From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Biggs v. Armel

United States District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
Jan 19, 2024
Civil Action 22-CV-2663 (E.D. Pa. Jan. 19, 2024)

Opinion

Civil Action 22-CV-2663

01-19-2024

MARK BIGGS, Petitioner, v. ERIC ARMEL, et al., Respondents.


ORDER

JOHN M. GALLAGHER, United States District Court Judge

AND NOW, this 19th day of January 2024, upon consideration of Petitioner's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (ECF No. 1), Respondent's Response in Opposition (ECF No. 15), and the Report and Recommendation from the Honorable United States Magistrate Judge Carol Sandra Moore Wells (ECF No. 22), IT IS HEREBY ORDERED as follows:

1. The Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 22) is APPROVED and ADOPTED;
2. The Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (ECF No. 1) is DISMISSED and DENIED, without an evidentiary hearing; and
3. Petitioner has neither shown denial of a federal constitutional right, nor established that reasonable jurist would disagree with this Court's procedural disposition of his claims. Consequently, a certificate of appealability is DENIED.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Courts is DIRECTED to mark this case CLOSED.


Summaries of

Biggs v. Armel

United States District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
Jan 19, 2024
Civil Action 22-CV-2663 (E.D. Pa. Jan. 19, 2024)
Case details for

Biggs v. Armel

Case Details

Full title:MARK BIGGS, Petitioner, v. ERIC ARMEL, et al., Respondents.

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

Date published: Jan 19, 2024

Citations

Civil Action 22-CV-2663 (E.D. Pa. Jan. 19, 2024)