From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Cooley v. Brooks

United States District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania
Apr 8, 2009
Civil Action No. 07-285 Erie (W.D. Pa. Apr. 8, 2009)

Summary

finding that a petitioner's own erroneous belief of the law did not sustain an ineffective assistance of counsel claim

Summary of this case from Kluger v. United States

Opinion

Civil Action No. 07-285 Erie.

April 8, 2009


MEMORANDUM ORDER


This habeas corpus action was received by the Clerk of Court on October 17, 2007, and was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Susan Paradise Baxter for report and recommendation in accordance with the Magistrates Act, 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), and Rules 72.1.3 and 72.1.4 of the Local Rules for Magistrates.

The Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation [Doc. No. 76], filed on March 26, 2009, recommended that Petitioner's Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus [Doc. No. 57] be denied and that a certificate of appealability be denied. The parties were allowed ten (10) days from the date of service to file objections. Service was made on Petitioner by certified mail and on Respondents. Petitioner filed objections and a letter to the Court on March 31, 2009 [Doc. No. 78 and Doc. No. 79]. After de novo review of the amended petition and documents in the case, together with the Report and Recommendation and objections thereto, the following order is entered:

AND NOW, this 8th day of April, 2009;

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Petitioner's Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus [Doc. No. 57] is DENIED and a certificate of appealability is DENIED.

The Report and Recommendation [Doc. No. 76] of Magistrate Judge Baxter, filed on March 26, 2009, is adopted as the opinion of the Court.


Summaries of

Cooley v. Brooks

United States District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania
Apr 8, 2009
Civil Action No. 07-285 Erie (W.D. Pa. Apr. 8, 2009)

finding that a petitioner's own erroneous belief of the law did not sustain an ineffective assistance of counsel claim

Summary of this case from Kluger v. United States
Case details for

Cooley v. Brooks

Case Details

Full title:ROMEO COOLEY, Petitioner, v. SUPERINTENDENT BROOKS, et al., Respondents

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

Date published: Apr 8, 2009

Citations

Civil Action No. 07-285 Erie (W.D. Pa. Apr. 8, 2009)

Citing Cases

Kluger v. United States

The Court need not credit Kluger's incorrect assertion of law as a basis to establish actual prejudice. See…

DcOsta v. United States

See, e.g., Cooley v. Brooks, No. 07-285, 2009 WL 959870, at *3 (W.D. Pa. Apr. 8, 2009) (stating that…