From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Young v. Good

United States District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
Sep 12, 2006
CIVIL ACTION No. 06-2164 (E.D. Pa. Sep. 12, 2006)

Opinion

CIVIL ACTION No. 06-2164.

September 12, 2006


ORDER


AND NOW, this 12th day of September, 2006, upon consideration of the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Document No. 1), the Respondent/Commonwealth's Answer to Petitioner's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, the Report and Recommendation filed by United States Magistrate Judge Carol Sandra Moore Wells (Document No. 11), and no objections to the Report and Recommendation having been filed, and after a thorough and independent review of the record, it is ORDERED that:

1) The Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Wells is APPROVED and ADOPTED;

2) The Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE; and,

Because the petition is being dismissed without prejudice to allow petitioner to file a timely PCRA petition in state court exhausting all claims, it will not be treated as the petitioner's first habeas petition. Hull v. Kyler, 190 F.3d 88, 103-04 (3d Cir. 1999) (citations omitted).

3) There is no probable cause to issue a certificate of appealability.


Summaries of

Young v. Good

United States District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
Sep 12, 2006
CIVIL ACTION No. 06-2164 (E.D. Pa. Sep. 12, 2006)
Case details for

Young v. Good

Case Details

Full title:TIMOTHY L. YOUNG v. DAVID J. GOOD, THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF THE COUNTY OF…

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

Date published: Sep 12, 2006

Citations

CIVIL ACTION No. 06-2164 (E.D. Pa. Sep. 12, 2006)