GORDON v. THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF THE COUNTY OF MONTGOMERY et al

Filing 26

ORDER THAT PETITIONER'S OBJECTIONS TO THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION ARE OVERRULED; THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVED AND ADOPTED; THE PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS IS DENIED AND DISMISSED; THERE IS NO BASIS FOR THE ISSUANCE OF A CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY.. SIGNED BY HONORABLE ANITA B. BRODY ON 6/28/16. 6/30/16 ENTERED AND COPIES E-MAILED TO COUNSEL.(pr, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
WILLIAM GORDON III,
Petitioner,
v.
JACK SOMMERS, et al.,
Respondents.

:
:
:
:
:
:
:

CIVIL ACTION
No. 14-7071

ORDER
AND NOW, this ____28th ___ day of June, 2016, upon careful and independent
consideration of the petition for writ of habeas corpus and the parties’ briefs, and after review of
United States Magistrate Judge Elizabeth T. Hey’s Report and Recommendation and Petitioner’s
objections to the Report and Recommendation, it is ORDERED that:
1. Petitioner’s Objections to the Report and Recommendation are OVERRULED.
2. The Report and Recommendation is APPROVED and ADOPTED.
3. The petition for writ of habeas corpus is DENIED and DISMISSED.
4. There is no basis for the issuance of a certificate of appealability.1

s/Anita B. Brody
____________________________________
ANITA B. BRODY, J.
Copies VIA ECF on _________ to:

1

Copies MAILED on _______ to:

A certificate of appealability is granted only if the petitioner shows “that jurists of reason would
find it debatable whether the petition states a valid claim of the denial of a constitutional right and
that jurists of reason would find it debatable whether the district court was correct in its
procedural ruling.” Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); see also United States v. Doe,
810 F.3d 132, 144 (3d Cir. 2015). Gordon has not made such a showing.