From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Etienne v. Sobina

United States District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
Aug 10, 2011
CIVIL ACTION NO. 10-5522 (E.D. Pa. Aug. 10, 2011)

Opinion

CIVIL ACTION NO. 10-5522.

August 10, 2011


ORDER


AND NOW, on this 10th day of August, 2011, upon consideration of Petitioner Emmanuel Etienne's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (ECF No. 1) and his Amended Petition (ECF No. 10), United States Magistrate Judge Carol Sandra Moore Wells's Report and Recommendation dated March 30, 2011 (ECF No. 14), Petitioner's objections thereto (ECF No. 18), and all related filings, and for the reasons in the accompanying Memorandum on Petitions for Writ of Habeas Corpus, it is hereby ORDERED as follows:

1. The Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 14) is APPROVED and ADOPTED consistent with the accompanying Memorandum;
2. Petitioner's Objections to the Report of Recommendation (ECF No. 18) are OVERRULED;
3. Petitioner's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (ECF No. 1) and Amended Petition (ECF NO. 10) are DENIED with prejudice and DISMISSED without an evidentiary hearing;
4. There is no probable cause to issue a certificate of appealability;
5. The Clerk shall mark this matter as CLOSED for statistical purposes.


Summaries of

Etienne v. Sobina

United States District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
Aug 10, 2011
CIVIL ACTION NO. 10-5522 (E.D. Pa. Aug. 10, 2011)
Case details for

Etienne v. Sobina

Case Details

Full title:EMMANUEL ETIENNE, Petitioner, v. RAYMOND SOBINA, et al. Respondents

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

Date published: Aug 10, 2011

Citations

CIVIL ACTION NO. 10-5522 (E.D. Pa. Aug. 10, 2011)

Citing Cases

Williams v. Davis

Jan. 21, 2014) (“Even fully crediting [petitioner's claims that his attorney failed to inform him of the…

Henry v. Smith

Furthermore, an attorney's failure to notify a defendant of the disposition of his appeal is "ordinary…