SAUNDERS v. MAHALLY et al
| LAMONT SAUNDERS |
| LARRY MAHALLY, THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA and THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF PHILADELPHIA COUNTY |
| 2:2016cv02690 |
| May 31, 2016 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania |
| Philadelphia Office |
| Philadelphia |
| JAMES KNOLL GARDNER |
| LYNNE A. SITARSKI |
| General |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 |
| None |
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
36
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER THAT PETITIONER'S MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM FINAL ORDER 28 IS DENIED WITH PREJUDICE. A CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY WILL NOT ISSUE BECAUSE REASONABLE JURISTS WOULD NOT DEBATE THE PROPRIETY OF THIS COURT'S DISPOSITION OF PETITIONER'S CLAIMS. THE CLERK OF COURT SHALL MARK THIS CASE CLOSED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. SIGNED BY HONORABLE GERALD A. MCHUGH ON 5/25/21. 5/25/21 ENTERED & E-MAILED. NOT MAILED TO SAUNDERS. (fdc)
|
|
Filing
13
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE LYNNE A. SITARSKI, AND THAT PETITIONER'S OBJECTIONS TO THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION ARE OVERRULED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT THE PETITION IS DENIED WITH PREJUDICE, AND THAT A CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY IS DENIED. THE CLERK OF COURT SHALL MARK THIS CASE CLOSED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. SIGNED BY HONORABLE JAMES KNOLL GARDNER ON 1/24/17. 1/25/17 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED TO PRO SE' AND E-MAILED. (ky, )
|
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.
