From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Brown v. Lamas

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
May 31, 2012
CIVIL ACTION NO. 11-1066 (E.D. Pa. May. 31, 2012)

Opinion

CIVIL ACTION NO. 11-1066

05-31-2012

MICHAEL BROWN, Petitioner, v. SUPERINTENDENT LAMAS, et al., Respondents.


ORDER

AND NOW, this ____ day of May, 2012, upon consideration of Petitioner's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus and Memorandum of Law in support thereof (Docs. 1 and 2); the Response in Opposition to the Petition (Doc. 11); Petitioner's Reply (Doc. 12 and 13); the Report and Recommendation by Chief United States Magistrate Judge Carol Sandra Moore Wells (Doc. 14); and Petitioner's Objections in Opposition thereto (Doc. 16), IT IS ORDERED that:

1) The Report and Recommendation is APPROVED AND ADOPTED.
2) The petition for writ of habeas corpus is DENIED WITH PREJUDICE.
3) There is no probable cause to issue a certificate of appealability.
4) The Clerk of Court shall mark this case as closed for statistical purposes.

BY THE COURT:

__________________

Hon. Petrese B. Tucker , U.S.D.J.


Summaries of

Brown v. Lamas

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
May 31, 2012
CIVIL ACTION NO. 11-1066 (E.D. Pa. May. 31, 2012)
Case details for

Brown v. Lamas

Case Details

Full title:MICHAEL BROWN, Petitioner, v. SUPERINTENDENT LAMAS, et al., Respondents.

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

Date published: May 31, 2012

Citations

CIVIL ACTION NO. 11-1066 (E.D. Pa. May. 31, 2012)