Kelly Bey v. Keen et al
| David F Kelly Bey |
| PA State Attorney General and Daniel S. Keen |
| 3:2012cv02005 |
| October 5, 2012 |
| US District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania |
| Scranton Office |
| Franklin |
| JV |
| Richard P. Conaboy |
| Habeas Corpus (General) |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State) |
| 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
12
MEMORANDUM Based upon a careful review of Kelly Beys pending habeas corpus petition Kelly Bey does not raise any allegation or claim that the sentence which he is presently serving was increased byhis August 24, 2007 sentence. Moreover, there are si mply no facts presented which could support such a claim.In conclusion, Respondent has submitted a written admission by the Petitioner himself that the criminal sentence being challenged in this action has expired. Second, there has been no showing made in this matter that this is a situation where a habeas petitioner is seeking to challenge a current sentence on the grounds that it was increased/enhanced by an expired conviction and sentence. Pursuant to the standards announced in Maleng, Dan iels, and Coss, Kelly Beys present § 2254 petition, as stated, may not be entertained by this Court. The petition for writ of habeas corpus will be dismissed. An appropriate Order will enter.Signed by Honorable Richard P. Conaboy on 12/5/12. (cc)
|
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 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.
