GURU v. GILMORE et al
ORDERED THAT THE PETITIONERS OBJECTIONS ARE OVERRULED; THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE RICHARD A. LLORET IS APPROVED AND ADOPTED; THE PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS IS DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE; THERE IS NO PROBABLE CAUSE TO ISSUE A CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY.. SIGNED BY HONORABLE TIMOTHY J. SAVAGE ON 2/16/21. 2/17/21 ENTERED AND COPIES E-MAILED.(jpd, )
Case 2:19-cv-05065-TJS Document 37 Filed 02/16/21 Page 1 of 2
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
ASHOK KUMAR GURU
SUPERINENDENT ROBERT GILMORE, :
SCI-Greene, THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY :
OF THE COUNTY OF PHILADELPHIA,
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE
STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA
NOW, this 16th day of February, 2021, upon consideration of Ashok Kuman
Guru’s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. No. 1), the Commonwealth’s response
to the petition, Mr. Guru’s counselled reply, and his Amended Petition for Writ of
Habeas Corpus Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Doc. No. 18), the Commonwealth’s
supplemental response and Mr. Guru’s reply, the Report and Recommendation filed by
United States Magistrate Judge Richard A. Lloret (Document No. 32), and the
petitioner’s objections to the Report and Recommendation, and after a thorough and
independent review of the record, it is ORDERED that:
The petitioner’s objections are OVERRULED;
The Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Richard A. Lloret is
APPROVED and ADOPTED;1
The Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus is DISMISSED WITHOUT
The Magistrate Judge’s recitation of the factual and procedural history is accurate. His legal analysis is
thorough and correct. Therefore, we can add nothing to the well-reasoned and exhaustive report.
Case 2:19-cv-05065-TJS Document 37 Filed 02/16/21 Page 2 of 2
There is no probable cause to issue a certificate of appealability.
/s/ TIMOTHY J. SAVAGE 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?