WESTBROOK v. THOMAS et al
ORDER THAT THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVED AND ADOPTED; THE PETITION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS SI DENIED; A CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILTY SHALL NOT ISSUE; THE CLERK OF COURT SHALL MARK THIS CASE CLOSED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. SIGNED BY HONORABLE JOEL H. SLOMSKY ON 2/23/16. 2/23/16 ENTERED AND COPIES E-MAILED. (jpd)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
SUPERINTENDANT JOHN THOMAS, et al.,
AND NOW, this 22nd day of February 2016, upon consideration of Petitioner’s pro se
Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. No. 1), Respondents’ Response to the Petition for Writ
of Habeas Corpus (Doc. No. 9), the Report and Recommendation filed by United States
Magistrate Judge Henry S. Perkin (Doc. No. 10), and Petitioner’s Objections to the Magistrate
Judge’s Report and Recommendation (Doc. Nos. 14, 15, 16, 17), and in accordance with the
Opinion issued this day, it is hereby ORDERED that:
1. The Report and Recommendation (Doc. No. 10) is APPROVED and ADOPTED.
2. The Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. No. 1) is DENIED.
3. A certificate of appealability SHALL NOT issue, in that the Petitioner has not made
a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right nor demonstrated that
reasonable jurists would debate the correctness of this ruling. See 28 U.S.C. §
2253(c)(2); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473 (2000).
4. The Clerk of Court shall mark this case CLOSED for statistical purposes.
BY THE COURT:
/ s/ J oel H. S l om sk y
JOEL H. SLOMSKY, J.
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?