From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Ryan v. Decker

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
Jul 31, 2013
3:13-CV-682 (M.D. Pa. Jul. 31, 2013)

Opinion

3:13-CV-682

07-31-2013

KERN HORACE RYAN, Petitioner v. THOMAS DECKER, et al., Respondents


( ) ORDER

AND NOW, THIS 31st DAY OF JULY 2013, upon review of Magistrate Judge Carlson's Report & Recommendation (Doc. 5) for clear error or manifest injustice, and Ryan's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. 1), IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:

1. The Report & Recommendation (Doc. 5) is ADOPTED.

2. Ryan's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. 1) is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE to renewal at such time, if any, as the delay and detention become unreasonable and excessive.

3. The Clerk of Court is directed to CLOSE the case.

/s/_________

Robert D. Mariani

United States District Judge


Summaries of

Ryan v. Decker

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
Jul 31, 2013
3:13-CV-682 (M.D. Pa. Jul. 31, 2013)
Case details for

Ryan v. Decker

Case Details

Full title:KERN HORACE RYAN, Petitioner v. THOMAS DECKER, et al., Respondents

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

Date published: Jul 31, 2013

Citations

3:13-CV-682 (M.D. Pa. Jul. 31, 2013)

Citing Cases

Skinner v. Bigott

Courts elsewhere in the Circuit also have reached differing conclusions. See Ryan v. Decker, No. 13-682, 2013…

Singh v. Sabol

However, "[w]here the delay is attributable to actions taken by the alien in the course of litigating the…