JOHNSON v. GIROUX et al

Filing 29

ORDER THAT PETITIONER'S OBJECTIONS ARE OVERRULED. THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE THOMAS J. RUETER [DOC. 17] IS APPROVED AND ADOPTED. THE PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS IS DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. THE PETITIONER HAVING FAILED TO DEMONSTRATE THAT A REASONABLE JURIST COULD CONCLUDE THAT THE COURT IS INCORRECT IN DISMISSING THE PETITION, THERE IS NO GROUND TO ISSUE A CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY. THE PETITIONER' MOTION FOR TRANSCRIPTS [DOC. 24] IS DENIED AS MOOT. THE PETITIONERS MOTION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS [DOC. 27] IS DENIED AS MOOT. THE CLERK IS DIRECTED TO MARK THIS CASE CLOSED. SIGNED BY HONORABLE JEFFREY L. SCHMEHL ON 8/29/17. 8/30/17 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED TO UNREP, E-MAILED.(er, )

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA MICHAEL LEVANT JOHNSON v. C.A. NO. 15-4242 NANCY GIROUX, SUPERINTENDENT, et al. ORDER AND NOW, this 29th day of August, 2017, upon careful consideration of the petition for writ of habeas corpus filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, the response, the thorough and well-reasoned report and recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Thomas J. Rueter, petitioner’s objections to the report and recommendation, it is hereby ORDERED that: 1. Petitioner's objections are OVERRULED. 2. The report and recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Thomas J. Rueter [Doc. 17] is APPROVED and ADOPTED. 3. The petition for writ of habeas corpus is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. 4. The petitioner having failed to demonstrate that a reasonable jurist could conclude that the court is incorrect in dismissing the petition, there is no ground to issue a certificate of appealability. 5. The petitioner’s motion for transcripts [Doc. 24] is DENIED as moot. 6. The petitioner’s motion for writ of mandamus [Doc. 27] is DENIED as moot. 7. The Clerk is DIRECTED to mark this case closed. BY THE COURT: /s/ Jeffrey L. Schmehl JEFFREY L. SCHMEHL, 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?