EVERETT v. SUPERINTENDENT, SCI FAYETTE et al

Filing 22

ORDER. After a de novo review of the pleadings and documents in the case, together with the Report and Recommendation (Doc. 19 ) and the Objections thereto (Doc. 20 ), it hereby is ORDERED that Petitioner's habeas petition (Doc. 1 ) is DISMISSED; a certificate of appealability is DENIED; and the Report and Recommendation (Doc. 19 ) is ADOPTED as the Opinion of the District Court. Signed by Judge Cathy Bissoon on 12/13/18. (wss)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA JEVON A. EVERETT, ) ) Petitioner, ) ) v. ) ) SUPERINTENDENT, SCI FAYETTE, and ) THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE ) STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA, ) ) Respondents. ) Civil Action No. 15-1639 Judge Cathy Bissoon Magistrate Judge Lisa Pupo Lenihan MEMORANDUM ORDER This case has been referred to United States Magistrate Judge Lisa Pupo Lenihan for pretrial proceedings in accordance with the Magistrates Act, 28 U.S.C. §§ 636(b)(l)(A) and (B), and Local Rule of Civil Procedure 72. On December 3, 2018, the Magistrate Judge issued a Report (Doc. 19) recommending that Jevon A. Everett’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Doc. 1) be dismissed, and that a certificate of appealability be denied. Service of the Report and Recommendation was made, and Petitioner filed Objections on December 7, 2018. See Doc. 20. After a de novo review of the pleadings and documents in the case, together with the Report and Recommendation and the Objections thereto, it hereby is ORDERED that Jevon A. Everett’s habeas petition is DISMISSED; a certificate of appealability is DENIED; and the Report and Recommendation is ADOPTED as the Opinion of the District Court. 1 IT IS SO ORDERED. December 13, 2018 s\Cathy Bissoon Cathy Bissoon United States District Judge cc (via Electronic Filing): Counsel of Record 2

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?