Walker v. Piazza, et al

Walker v. Piazza, et al

Case Number:	3:2006cv01224
Filed:	June 20, 2006
Court:	US District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania
Office:	Scranton Office
Presiding Judge:	EC
Presiding Judge:	James M. Munley
Nature of Suit:	Habeas Corpus (General)
Cause of Action:	28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Jury Demanded By:	None

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed	Document Text
August 22, 2023	Filing 88 ORDER - IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Petition Michael Walker's 83 Motion for relief under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b)(6) is DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction because it is a second or successive petition for a writ of habeas corpus un der 28 U.S.C. § 2254 filed without authorization from the United States Court of Appeals for the third Circuit. A certificate of appealability shall not issue, as Walker has not made a substantial showing of the denial of the constitutional righ t, or that "jurists of reason would find it debatable" whether this Court's procedural ruling is correct, Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000). Walker's motion for substitution of parties 84 and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis 86 are DISMISSED as moot. Signed by Chief Judge Matthew W. Brann on 8/22/2023. (ea)
September 28, 2009	Filing 57 MEMORANDUM and ORDER DENYING petitioner's claims due to procedural default and failure to demonstrate that the applicable state court decisions were either contrary to, or involved an unreasonable applciation of, clearly established Federal law; Clerk of Court is directed to CLOSE CASE; There is no basis for the issuance of a certificate of appealability.Signed by Honorable James M. Munley on 9/28/09. (sm, )

Date Filed

Document Text

August 22, 2023

Filing 88 ORDER - IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Petition Michael Walker's 83 Motion for relief under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b)(6) is DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction because it is a second or successive petition for a writ of habeas corpus un der 28 U.S.C. § 2254 filed without authorization from the United States Court of Appeals for the third Circuit. A certificate of appealability shall not issue, as Walker has not made a substantial showing of the denial of the constitutional righ t, or that "jurists of reason would find it debatable" whether this Court's procedural ruling is correct, Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000). Walker's motion for substitution of parties 84 and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis 86 are DISMISSED as moot. Signed by Chief Judge Matthew W. Brann on 8/22/2023. (ea)

September 28, 2009

Filing 57 MEMORANDUM and ORDER DENYING petitioner's claims due to procedural default and failure to demonstrate that the applicable state court decisions were either contrary to, or involved an unreasonable applciation of, clearly established Federal law; Clerk of Court is directed to CLOSE CASE; There is no basis for the issuance of a certificate of appealability.Signed by Honorable James M. Munley on 9/28/09. (sm, )

Access additional case information on PACER

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 Middle District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Walker v. Piazza, et al
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]

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?