GOINS v. KAUFFMAN

Filing 9

ORDER adopting Report and Recommendations re 4 that the petition for writ of habeas corpus is dismissed for lack of authorization to entertain a successive petition, because reasonable jurists could not conclude that a basis for appeal exists, a certificate of appealability is denied. 7 Motion to Appoint Counsel ; dismissing as moot 8 Motion to Appoint Counsel. Signed by Judge Arthur J. Schwab on 11/13/17. (lck)

Download PDF
0 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) MAURICE B. GOINS, Petitioner, vs. KEVIN KAUFFMAN, et al., Respondents. Civil Action No. 17-1338 ORDER T:4 . . AND NOW, t~is/ ~ day ofNovember, 2017, after the petitioner, Maurice B. Goins, filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus, and after a Report and Recommendation was filed by the United States Magistrate Judge granting the parties a period of time after being 0 served with a copy to file written objections thereto, and upon consideration of the objections filed by the petitioner, and upon independent review of the petition and upon consideration of the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 4), which is adopted as the opinion of this Court, IT IS ORDERED that the petition for a writ of habeas corpus filed by petitioner (ECF No. 3) is dismissed for lack of authorization to entertain a successive petition and, because reasonable.jurists could not conclude that a basis for appeal exists, a certificate of appealability is denied. IT IS FURHTER ORDERED that the motion to appoint counsel (ECF No. 7) and renewed motion to appoint counsel (ECF No. 8) are dismissed as moot. 0 0 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that pursuant to Rule 4(a)(l) of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure if the petitioner desires to appeal from this Order he must do so within thirty (30) days by filing a notice of appeal as provided in Rule 3, Fed. R. App. P. cc: 0 0 Maurice B. Goins EB-7972 SCI Huntingdon 1100 Pike Street Huntingdon, PA 16654-1112

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?