From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Martin v. Attorney Gen.

United States District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania
May 18, 2022
C. A. 20-193 Erie (W.D. Pa. May. 18, 2022)

Opinion

C. A. 20-193 Erie

05-18-2022

NICHOLAS MARTIN, Petitioner, v. THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA, et al., Respondents.


Richard A. Lanzillo Magistrate Judge

MEMORANDUM ORDER

SUSAN PARADISE BAXTER UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

This pro se action for habeas corpus relief was originally filed on July 9, 2020, by Petitioner Nicholas Martin, an inmate incarcerated at the State Correctional Institution at Rockview in Bellefonte, Pennsylvania (“SCI-Rockview”). In his habeas petition, Petitioner raises three claims of ineffective assistance of counsel challenging the conduct of his criminal trial attorney. The petition was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Richard A. Lanzillo, for report and recommendation in accordance with the Magistrate Judges Act, 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), and Rules 72.1.3 and 72.1.4 of the Local Rules for Magistrate Judges.

On April 6, 2022, Magistrate Judge Lanzillo issued a Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) recommending that the petition be denied and that the issuance of a Certificate of Appealability be denied [ECF No. 14]. In particular, with regard to each of Petitioner's claims, Judge Lanzillo concluded that the Pennsylvania Superior Court's application of the two-prong inquiry established by the Supreme Court in Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984), was not unreasonable. Objections to the R&R were due to be filed by April 25, 2022; however, no objections have been received from Petitioner.

Thus, after de novo review of the petition and documents in the case, together with the report and recommendation, the following order is entered:

AND NOW, this 17th day of May, 2022, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the within petition for a writ of habeas corpus is DISMISSED, without prejudice, and that a Certificate of Appealability is DENIED. The report and recommendation of Magistrate Judge Lanzillo, dated April 6, 2022 [ECF No. 14], is adopted as the opinion of this Court. As there are no further matters pending before the Court relative to the instant petition, the Clerk is directed to mark this case “CLOSED.”


Summaries of

Martin v. Attorney Gen.

United States District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania
May 18, 2022
C. A. 20-193 Erie (W.D. Pa. May. 18, 2022)
Case details for

Martin v. Attorney Gen.

Case Details

Full title:NICHOLAS MARTIN, Petitioner, v. THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF…

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

Date published: May 18, 2022

Citations

C. A. 20-193 Erie (W.D. Pa. May. 18, 2022)