EADDY v. SAUERS et al
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 WITH PREJUDICE; A CERTIFICATE OF APPEALBILITY IS DENIED. SIGNED BY HONORABLE J. WILLIAM DITTER, JR ON 2/22/12. 2/22/12 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED TO PRO SE PETITIONER AND E-MAILED. (jpd)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
JOSEPH D. EADDY,
MRS. D. SAUERS, et al.
AND NOW, this 21st day of February, 2012, upon consideration of the Petition for
Writ of Habeas Corpus filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, the Commonwealth’s
Response, the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Lynne A.
Sitarski, and Petitioner’s objections, I HEREBY ORDER as follows:
Petitioner’s objections to the Report and Recommendation are
The Report and Recommendation is APPROVED and ADOPTED.
The petition for writ of habeas corpus filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 is
DENIED with prejudice.
A certificate of appealability is DENIED.
/s/ J. William Ditter, Jr.
J. WILLIAM DITTER, JR., J.
Petitioner’s Objections to Judge Sitarski’s Report and Recommendation merely restate
the issues which Petitioner presented in his habeas petition. As Judge Sitarski’s Report and
Recommendation correctly and comprehensively addressed the claim of ineffective assistance of
counsel presented in Petitioner’s habeas petition, I conclude that Petitioner’s objections are
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?