GOINS v. KAUFFMAN
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)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
MAURICE B. GOINS,
KEVIN KAUFFMAN, et al.,
Civil Action No. 17-1338
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
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
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
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.
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.
Maurice B. Goins
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?