From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Willis v. Varner

United States District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
May 13, 2004
Civil Action No. 03-1692 (E.D. Pa. May. 13, 2004)

Summary

approving and adopting Report and Recommendation ("RR") filed Apr. 27, 2004

Summary of this case from Davis v. Lavan

Opinion

Civil Action No. 03-1692.

May 13, 2004


ORDER


AND NOW, this 13th day of May, 2004, upon careful and independent consideration of Petitioner's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus by a Person in State Custody, filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254, on March 21, 2003, the Response of the Commonwealth filed on September 15, 2003, the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge M. Faith Angell filed on April 29, 2004, and Petitioner's Objections to the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge filed on May 11, 2004, it is hereby ORDERED consistent with the Report and Recommendation as follows:

1. The Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus by a Person in State Custody filed March 21, 2003 is DENIED and DISMISSED.
2. The Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge M. Faith Angell filed April 29, 2004 is APPROVED and ADOPTED.
3. Petitioner's Objections to the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge filed May 11, 2004 are OVERRULED and DISMISSED. We find that the issues raised have already been properly dealt with by the Magistrate Judge.
4. A Certificate of Appealability is DENIED for the reasons stated in the foregoing Report and Recommendation.
5. We find that there has not been a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.

6. This case is CLOSED.


Summaries of

Willis v. Varner

United States District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
May 13, 2004
Civil Action No. 03-1692 (E.D. Pa. May. 13, 2004)

approving and adopting Report and Recommendation ("RR") filed Apr. 27, 2004

Summary of this case from Davis v. Lavan
Case details for

Willis v. Varner

Case Details

Full title:MARK WILLIS [EP-0065] v. BEN VARNER, et al

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

Date published: May 13, 2004

Citations

Civil Action No. 03-1692 (E.D. Pa. May. 13, 2004)

Citing Cases

Wilson v. Kerestes

The procedural rule set forth in § 9544(b) is an independent and adequate state procedural rule. See, e.g.,…

Laboy v. Pa State Attorney Gen.

See Young v. Kemp, 760 F.2d 1097, 1105 (11th Cir. 1985) (observing that "[a] federal habeas court has no…