SAVAGE v. COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA et al
ORDER AS FOLLOWS: 1. THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVED AND ADOPTED; 2. THE PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS IS DENIED; AND 3. THERE HAS BEEN NO SUBSTANTIAL SHOWING OF THE DENIAL OF A CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT REQUIRING THE ISSUANCE OF A CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY. SIGNED BY HONORABLE JEFFREY L. SCHMEHL ON 12/22/2015. 12/23/2015 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED TO PETITIONER AND E-MAILED.(lbs, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, et
AND NOW, this 22nd day of December, 2015, upon careful and independent
consideration of the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, the response thereto and the
reply to the response, and after review of the Report and Recommendation of United
States Magistrate Judge Marilyn Heffley and review of Petitioner’s objections to the
Report and Recommendation, it is hereby ORDERED as follows:
The Report and Recommendation is APPROVED and ADOPTED;
2. The Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus is DENIED; and
3. There has been no substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right
requiring the issuance of a certificate of appealability. 1
BY THE COURT:
/s/ Jeffrey L. Schmehl
Jeffrey L. Schmehl, J.
On October 5, 2015, Petitioner filed a letter in which he asked the Court to order his immediate release
from prison, due to the fact that his sentence will expire on December 25, 2015, and he will be released
from prison in the dead of winter and homeless. (See Docket No. 10.) For the reasons discussed more fully
in the Report and Recommendation, I deny this request, as federal courts should not upset a decision by
state parole board unless the determination was made based on constitutionally impermissible reasons.
Morissey, 408 U.S. 488-89. There is no evidence that the parole board’s decision was made for
constitutionally impermissible reasons in this matter; therefore, Petitioner’s request is denied.
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?