CLIFFORD, JR. v. KERESTES et al

Filing 19

ORDER THAT THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS (DOC. NO. 16 ) ARE APPROVED AND ADOPTED. THE PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS (DOC. NO. 1 ) IS DISMISSED AS MOOT. THERE IS NO PROBABLE CAUSE FOR A CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY. THE CLERK OF COURT SHALL MARK THIS CASE CLOSED FOR ALL PURPOSES, INCLUDING STATISTICS. SIGNED BY HONORABLE GENE E.K. PRATTER ON 9/2/2015. 9/3/2015 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED TO PRO SE AND E-MAILED. (aeg, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
RANSOM CLIFFORD, JR.,
Petitioner,
v.
SUPERINTENDENT KERESTES, et al.,
Respondents.

:
:
:
:
:
:
:

CIVIL ACTION
NO. 13-6659

ORDER
AND NOW, this 2nd day of September, 2015, having considered the Petition for Writ of
Habeas Corpus filed by Petitioner Ransom Clifford, Jr. (Docket No. 1), the Response to the
Petition (Doc. No. 15), and U.S. Magistrate Judge Marilyn Heffley’s Report &
Recommendations (Doc. No. 16), to which no objections have been filed,1 and the state court
record, it is hereby ORDERED that:
1.

The Report & Recommendations are APPROVED and ADOPTED.

2.

The Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Docket No. 1) is DISMISSED AS
MOOT.

3.

There is no probable cause to issue a certificate of appealability.2

4.

The Clerk of Court shall mark this case CLOSED for all purposes, including
statistics.

BY THE COURT:

/s/ Gene E.K. Pratter
GENE E.K. PRATTER
United States District Judge
1

The Local Rules provide that “[a]ny party may object to a magistrate judge’s order
determining a motion or matter . . . within fourteen (14) days after issuance of the magistrate
judge’s order . . . .” E.D. Pa. Local R. Civ. P. 72.1(IV)(a). Judge Heffley issued her Report and
Recommendation on March 31, 2015; objections were therefore due April 14, 2015.
2
A certificate of appealability may issue only upon “a substantial showing of the
denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2). A petitioner must “demonstrate that
reasonable jurists would find the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims debatable
or wrong.” Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Lambert v. Blackwell, 387 F.3d 210,
230 (3d Cir. 2004). The Court agrees with Magistrate Judge Heffley that there is no probable
cause to issue such a certificate in this action.