Siv v. Mason

Full title: SOPHAL SIV Petitioner, v. SUPERINTENDENT MASON; THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF…

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

Date published: Aug 11, 2022

Civil Action 20-3632 (E.D. Pa. Aug. 11, 2022)

Opinion

Civil Action 20-3632

08-11-2022

SOPHAL SIV Petitioner, v. SUPERINTENDENT MASON; THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF THE COUNTY OF PHILADELPHIA; and, THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA Respondents.

C. DARNELL JONES, II J.

ORDER

C. DARNELL JONES, II J.

AND NOW this 10^th day of August 2022, upon careful and independent consideration of: Sophal Siv's Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (ECF No. 6); Commonwealth's Response in Opposition thereto (ECF No. 16); the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Richard A. Lloret (ECF No. 23); Petitioner's Objections (ECF No. 24); and, the Commonwealth's Response to Petitioner's Objections (ECF No. 31), it is hereby ORDERED as follows:

1. In accordance with this Court's accompanying Memorandum, Petitioner's Objections (ECF No. 24) are DENIED;

2. The Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 23) is APPROVED and ADOPTED;

3. The Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (ECF No. 6) is DENIED;

4. No Certificate of Appealability shall issue under 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A) because “the applicant has [not] made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right[,]” under 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2), since he has not demonstrated that “reasonable jurists” would find my “assessment of the constitutional claims debatable or wrong.” Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); see United States v. Cepero, 224 F.3d 256, 262-63 (3d Cir. 2000), abrogated on other grounds by Gonzalez v. Thaler, 565 U.S. (2012); and,

5. The Clerk of Court shall mark this file CLOSED.