STEWART v. COLEMAN et al
| RAYMOND LOUIS STEWART |
| BRIAN V. COLEMAN, THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF THE COUNTY OF DELAWARE and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA |
| 2:2008cv05477 |
| November 20, 2008 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania |
| Habeas Corpus (General) Office |
| Delaware |
| R. BARCLAY SURRICK |
| None |
| Federal Question |
| 28:2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State) |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
24
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER THAT THE MOTION TO RECONSIDER AND FOR AN EVIDENTIARY HEARING (DOC. NO. 19, 23) BY RAYMOND LEWIS STEWART IS DENIED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT NO CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY WILL BE ISSUED BECAUSE STEWART HAS FAILED TO MAKE A SUBSTANTIAL SHOWING OF THE DENIAL OF A CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT. SIGNED BY HONORABLE LOWELL A. REED, JR ON 8/4/09. 8/4/09 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED TO PRO SE PETITIONER AND COUNSEL. (jpd)
|
|
Filing
18
ORDER THAT FOR THE REASONS SET FORTH ABOVE, THE PETITION IS DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE AND WITHOUT HEARING. IT IS FURTHERE ORDERED THAT NO CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY WILL BE ISSUED BECAUSE PETITIONER HAS FAILED TO MAKE A SUBSTANTIAL SHOWING OF THE DENIAL OF A CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT. THE CLERK OF COURT IS HEREBY DIRECTED TO CLSO THIS CASE STATISTICALLY. SIGNED BY HONORABLE LOWELL A. REED, JR ON 4/22/09. 4/22/09 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED TO PRO SE PETITIONER AND COUNSEL. (jpd)
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Pennsylvania Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
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.
