Brooker v. Oberlander

Full title: MIKECHEL BROOKER, Petitioner, v. DEREK F. OBERLANDER, Respondent.

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

Date published: Jul 29, 2022

Civil Action 19-5569 (E.D. Pa. Jul. 29, 2022)

Opinion

Civil Action 19-5569

07-29-2022

MIKECHEL BROOKER, Petitioner, v. DEREK F. OBERLANDER, Respondent.

Mitchell S. Goldberg, J.

ORDER

Mitchell S. Goldberg, J.

AND NOW, this 29^th day of July, 2022, upon careful consideration of Petitioner Mikechel Brooker's “Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus” (ECF No. 1), Respondent's response thereto (ECF No. 10), Petitioner's “Response and Motion to Amend and Supplement Initial Writ of Habeas Corpus” (ECF No. 37), the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Marilyn Heffley (ECF No. 38), and noting that Petitioner has failed to file timely objections to the Report and Recommendation despite being given three extensions to do so (ECF Nos. 41, 43, 45), it is hereby ORDERED that:

1. The Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 38) is APPROVED and ADOPTED.

2. Petitioner's Pre-Disposition Motion for Appointment of Counsel, Expansion of the Record and Rule 6 Pre-Disposition Discovery (ECF. No. 2) is DENIED;

3. Petitioner's Motion to Amend and Supplement Initial Writ of Habeas Corpus (ECF. No. 37) is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. The Motion to Amend and Supplement is GRANTED to the extent Petitioner seeks to amend and supplement his petition for habeas corpus. The Motion is DENIED to the extent that it seeks discovery or other relief on the claims raised therein;

4. Petitioner's “Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus” (ECF No. 1) is DENIED.

5. There is no basis for the issuance of a certificate of appealability.

6. The Clerk of Court shall mark this case CLOSED for statistical purposes.