MASSINA v. MAHALLY et al
ORDER THAT THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVED AND ADOPTED; THE PETITION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS IS DISMISSED AND DENIED, WITHOUT AN EVIDENTIARY HEARING; AND PETITIONER HAS NEITHER SHOWN DENIAL OF A FEDERAL CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT, NOR ESTABLI SHED THAT REASONABLE JURISTS WOULD DISAGREE WITH THIS COURT'S PROCEDURAL DISPOSITION OF HIS CLAIMS. CONSEQUENTLY, A CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY IS DENIED.. SIGNED BY HONORABLE WENDY BEETLESTONE ON 5/16/17. 5/17/17 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED TO PRO SE PETITIONER, E-MAILED TO COUNSEL.(pr, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
~y .J 8 2017
LAWRENCE MAHALL Y, et al.
AND NOW, this
Ib'f"day of Mf;l1
, 2017, upon consideration of the
Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus, the Commonwealth's Response, the other documents filed
by the parties, and after review of the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate
Judge Carol Sandra Moore Wells, is hereby ORDERED that:
I. The Report and Recommendation is APPROVED AND ADOPTED;
2. The Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus is DISMISSED and DENIED, without an
evidentiary hearing; and
3. Petitioner has neither shown denial of a federal constitutional right, nor established
that reasonable jurists would disagree with this court's procedural disposition of his
claims. Consequently, a certificate of appealability is DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
WENDY BEETLESTONE J.
MAY 17 2017
CLERK OF COUFfT
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?