BRADLEY v. U.S. PAROLE COMMISSION

Filing 17

ORDER: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: Magistrate Judge Joseph F. Saporito Jr.'s 16 Report and Recommendation is ADOPTED IN ITS ENTIRETY; 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus filed by Walter Bradley is DENIED; No Certificate of Appealability shall issue; and the Clerk of Courts is directed to close this case. Signed by Honorable Matthew W. Brann on 6/15/2017. (jn)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA WALTER BRADLEY, Petitioner, v. U.S. PAROLE COMMISSION, Respondent. : : : : : : : : : No. 4:15-CV-00247 (Judge Brann) (Magistrate Judge Saporito) ORDER JUNE 15, 2017 Before the Court for disposition is a Report and Recommendation filed by Magistrate Judge Joseph F. Saporito, Jr. on May 23, 2017.1 In this Report, Magistrate Judge Saporito recommended that (1) Walter Bradley’s Petition for A Writ of Habeas Corpus Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 be dismissed with prejudice, and (2) no certificate of appealability be issued.2 No objections to this Report and Recommendation have since been filed. Upon designation, a magistrate judge may “conduct hearings, including evidentiary hearings, and . . . submit to a judge of the court proposed findings of fact and recommendations.”3 Once filed, this Report and Recommendation is 1 ECF No. 16. 2 Id. 3 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1)(B). - 1- disseminated to the parties in the case who then have the opportunity to file written objections.4 Where no objection is made to a report and recommendation, the court should, as a matter of good practice, “satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation.”5 Nevertheless, whether timely objections are made or not, the district court may accept, reject or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge.6 Following independent review of the record, I am satisfied that the Report and Recommendation contains no clear facial error. In the interests of judicial economy, I will not rehash Magistrate Judge Saporito’s sound reasoning and legal citation. The Court is in full agreement that Walter Bradley’s Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 is patently meritless and should be dismissed with prejudice. AND NOW, therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. Magistrate Judge Joseph F. Saporito, Jr.’s Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 16) is ADOPTED IN ITS ENTIRETY; 4 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1). 5 Rieder v. Apfel, 115 F.Supp.2d 496, 499 (M.D.Pa. 2000) (citing United States v. Raddatz, 447 U.S. 667, 676 (1980)). 6 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Local Rule 72.31. - 2- 2. Walter Bradley’s Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE; 3. No Certificate of Appealability shall issue; and 4. The Clerk of Courts is directed to close this case. BY THE COURT: s/ Matthew W. Brann Matthew W. Brann United States District Judge - 3-

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?