EXUM v. FOLINO et al
Filing
26
ORDER THAT THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVED AND ADOPTED; THE PETITION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS IS DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE; A CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY WILL NOT ISSUE; AND THE CLERK IS DIRECTED TO MARK THIS CASE CLOSED.. SIGNED BY HONORABLE LAWRENCE F. STENGEL ON 2/2/17. 2/3/17 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED TO PRO SE PETITIONER, E-MAILED TO COUNSEL.(pr, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRIC'I't16JJl.lT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENN8'f.V~~~
v
r
l011
ALFONZO EXUM,
Petitioner,
CIVIL ACTION
v.
N0.15-5193
LOUIS FOLINO, et al.,
Respondents.
ORDER
AND NOW, this 2"ct day of February, 2017, upon careful and independent
consideration of the petition for writ of habeas corpus, and after review of the thorough
and well-reasoned Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge
Marilyn Heffley, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1
1.
The report and recommendation is APPROVED and ADOPTED;
2.
The petition for a writ of habeas corpus is DISMISSED with prejudice;
3.
A certificate of appealability WILL NOT ISSUE; and
1
Petitioner Alfonzo Exum brings this pro se petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant
to 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254. On June 29, 2016, United States Magistrate Judge Marilyn Heffley issued a
Report and Recommendation, recommending that the petition be dismissed. Petitioner sought
three separate extensions of time in which to file Objections to the Report and Recommendation,
each of which was granted; however, Petitioner was notified after the third extension that no
further extensions would be granted and that his Objections were due November 4, 2016. As of
the date of this Order, Petitioner has not filed any Objections. I will therefore approve and adopt
the Report and Recommendation, and dismiss the petition with prejudice without an evidentiary
hearing.
ENTERED
FEB O3 2017
CLERK OF COURT
1
4.
The Clerk is directed to mark this case CLOSED.
BY THE COURT
2
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?