LEAF v. COLEMAN et al

Filing 22

ORDER THAT PETITIONER'S OBJECTIONS TO THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES CHIEF MAGISTRATE JUDGE LINDA K. CARACAPPA ARE OVERRULED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES CHIEF MAGISTRATE JUDGE LINDA K. CARACAPPA IS APPROVED AND ADOPTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT THE PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS COPRUS BY A PERSON IN STATE CUSTODY IS DENIED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT, BECAUSE NO REASONABLE JURIST COULD FIND THIS RULING DEBATABLE AND BECAUSE THER E HAS BEEN NO SUBSTANTIAL SHOWING OF THE DENIAL OF A CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT, A CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY IS DENIED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT THE CLERK OF COURT SHALL MARK THIS MATTER CLOSED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. SIGNED BY HONORABLE JAMES KNOLL GARDNER ON 10/18/2016. 10/20/2016 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED TO PRO SE PETITIONER AND E-MAILED.(lbs, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
FAHEEM LEAF,
Petitioner
v.
JAY LANE;
THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF
PHILADELPHIA COUNTY; and
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE
STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA,
Respondents

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Civil Action
No. 14-cv-04126

O R D E R
NOW, this 18th day of October, 2016, upon
consideration of the following documents:
(1)

Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus by a
Person in State Custody (“Habeas Corpus
Petition”) filed by petitioner pro se on
June 27, 2014, 1 together with
(a)

Case Management Track Designation Form,
and

(b)

Letter from petitioner Faheem Leaf
dated June 27, 2014;

1

Although the docket entries reflect that the Habeas Corpus
Petition was filed July 3, 2014, petitioner certifies that “this petition was
filed on [June 27, 2014], the day it was delivered to prison officials at the
SCI Fayette to be mailed.” See Letter from petitioner Faheem Leaf dated June
27, 2014 attached to the petition.
Pursuant to the prison mailbox rule, this court will consider the
date of filing as June 27, 2014. Under the prison mailbox rule, a habeas
corpus petition is deemed filed on the date the petitioner gave it to prison
officials for mailing. Burns v. Morton, 134 F.3d 109, 113 (3d Cir. 1997).
The dates of filing, noted in this Order, for petitioner’s other
documents also reflect application of the prison mailbox rule.

(2)

Response to Petition for Writ of Habeas
Corpus, which response was filed by
respondents on August 13, 2015, together
with Exhibit A;

(3)

Petitioner’s Traverse to State[’]s Response
[of] August 13, 2015 (“Traverse”), which
Traverse was filed September 29, 2015, 2
together with
(a)

Opinion [of] PCRA [Court],

(b)

Opinion [of] Superior [Court],

(c)

Appendices A through E;

(4)

Report and Recommendation of United States
Chief Magistrate Judge Linda K. Caracappa
dated October 27, 2015 and filed October 28,
2015; and

(5)

Petitioner’s Objections to the United States
Magistrate’s Report and Recommendation
Entered on October 27, 2015 (“Petitioner’s
Objections”), which objections were filed
January 11, 2016;

and for the reasons expressed in the accompanying Opinion; it
appearing, after de novo review of this matter, that the Report
and Recommendation of United States Chief Magistrate Judge Linda
K. Caracappa correctly determined the pertinent legal and
factual issues presented in the Habeas Corpus Petition,
2

As stated in footnote one, the filing dates of petitioner’s
documents reflect application of the prison mailbox rule.
Here, however, the certificate of service attached to
petitioner’s Traverse is undated. See Traverse at page 28. Although it is
unclear when exactly petitioner gave his Traverse to prison officials,
petitioner must have done so prior to September 29, 2015 because
September 29, 2015 is the postmark date. See Appendix E to Traverse at
page 90. Therefore, I will consider September 29, 2015 as the filing date.

-

ii -

IT IS ORDERED that Petitioner’s Objections to the
Report and Recommendation of United States Chief Magistrate
Judge Linda K. Caracappa are overruled.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Report and
Recommendation of United States Chief Magistrate Judge Linda K.
Caracappa is approved and adopted.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Petition for Writ of
Habeas Corpus by a Person in State Custody is denied.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, because no reasonable
jurist could find this ruling debatable and because there has
been no substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional
right, a certificate of appealability is denied.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Court shall
mark this matter closed for statistical purposes.
BY THE COURT:

_/s/_JAMES KNOLL GARDNER____
James Knoll Gardner
United States District Judge

-

iii -