HENRY v. COLEMAN et al

Filing 28

ORDER JUDGMENT THAT PETITIONER'S OBJECTIONS ARE OVERRULED; THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVED AND ADOPTED IN PART; THE PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS IS DENIED AND DIMISSED; A CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY SHALL NOT ISSUE UNDER 28 U.S.C. SECTION 2253(C)(1)(A) AND THE CLERK OF COURT SHALL CLOSE THIS ACTION. SIGNED BY HONORABLE PAUL S. DIAMOND ON 3/13/18. 3/14/18 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED TO PETITIONER AND EMAILED TO COUNSEL.(jaa, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
JOSHUA HENRY,

:
:
:
:
:
:
:

Petitioner,
v.
BRIAN V. COLEMAN, et al.,
Respondents.

Civ. No. 14-6833

JUDGMENT
AND NOW, this 13th day of March, 2018, upon consideration of the Petition for Habeas
Relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Doc. No. 1), the Commonwealth’s Response to Petition for Writ
of Habeas Corpus (Doc. No. 11), Judge Lloret’s Report and Recommendation (Doc. No. 18),
Petitioner’s Objections (Doc. No. 22), the Commonwealth’s Response to Objections (Doc. No.
24), all other related submissions (Doc. No. 26), and after a complete and independent review of
the record, it is hereby ORDERED that:
1. Petitioner’s Objections (Doc. No. 22) are OVERRULED;
2. The Report and Recommendation (Doc. No. 18) is APPROVED and ADOPTED in
part;
3. The Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. No. 1) is DENIED and DISMISSED;
4. A Certificate of Appealability shall NOT ISSUE under 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A)
because Petitioner has not demonstrated that “reasonable jurists” would find my
“assessment of the constitutional claims debatable or wrong.” Slack v. McDaniel,
529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); and
5. The CLERK OF COURT shall CLOSE this action.
AND IT IS SO ORDERED.
/s/ Paul S. Diamond
_______________________
Paul S. Diamond, J.