U.S. v. Adderly

Full title: UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. NEZZY ADDERLY

Court: United States District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania

Date published: Mar 19, 2010

CIVIL ACTION NO. 09-3338, CRIMINAL ACTION NO. 06-548 (E.D. Pa. Mar. 19, 2010)

Opinion

CIVIL ACTION NO. 09-3338, CRIMINAL ACTION NO. 06-548.

March 19, 2010

ORDER

JOEL SLOMSKY, District Judge

AND NOW, this 19^th day of March 2010, upon consideration of the Petition for the Writ of Habeas Corpus Under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 filed pro se ("Petition") (Doc. No. 44), the Government's Response to the Petition (Doc. No. 47), Petitioner's Reply to the Government's Response filed pro se (Doc. No. 48), Petitioner's Amended Habeas Corpus Petition filed by appointed counsel ("Amended Petition") (Doc. No. 51), the Government's Response to the Amended Petition (Doc. No. 55), the Report and Recommendation filed by United States Magistrate Judge Carol Sandra Moore Wells (Doc. No. 56), Petitioner's Reply to the Government's Response to the Amended Petition filed pro se (Doc. No, 57), Petitioner's Objection to the Report and Recommendation filed by appointed counsel (Doc. No. 58), Petitioner's Objection to the Report and Recommendation filed pro se (Doc. No. 59), and after an independent review of the pertinent record and for the reasons stated in the Opinion dated March 15, 2010, it is ORDERED as follows:

1. The Petitioner's Objections (Docs. No. 58 and 59) are OVERRULED.

2. The Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Carol Sandra Moore Wells (Doc. No. 56) is APPROVED and ADOPTED.

3. The Petition for the Writ of Habeas Corpus filed pro se (Doc. No. 44) and the Amended Petition filed by appointed counsel (Doc. No. 51) are DENIED.

3. All outstanding motions are DENIED as moot.

4. Defendant has neither shown a denial of a constitutional right, nor established that reasonable jurists would disagree with this Court's disposition of his claims. Consequently, a certificate of appealability is DENIED.

5. The Clerk's Office shall close this case.