Battle v. Christensen

M.D. Pennsylvania

Battle v. Christensen

DecidedDecember 4, 2023

Docket1:23-cv-00289

StatusUnknown

This text of Battle v. Christensen (Battle v. Christensen) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Battle v. Christensen, (M.D. Pa. 2023).

Pincite

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA BERNARD BATTLE, : No. 1:23-CV-0289 Petitioner : : (Judge Munley) Vv. FERNANDO GARZA,‘ : Respondent :

ORDER AND NOW, in accordance with the accompanying Memorandum, IT IS ORDERED THAT: 1. Petitioner Bernard Battle’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 is DENIED. 2. The Clerk of Court is directed to CLOSE this case.

, Zz Date: ae COURT: C JUDGE JULIA K. MU United States District Cou

1 Battle named “D. Christensen” as Respondent in this case. However, Battle is currenth confined at USP Canaan, so the appropriate respondent is the warden of that institution. Fernando Garza. (See Doc. 10 at 1 n.1); 28 U.S.C. § 2242; Rumsfeld v. Padilla, 542 U.S. 426. 434-35 (2004); see also 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Rule 2(a). The Court will therefore substitute the appropriate respondent in this matter. See FED. R. Civ. P. 25(d).

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA BERNARD BATTLE, : No. 1:23-CV-0289 Petitioner : : (Judge Munley) Vv. FERNANDO GARZA,‘ : Respondent :

ORDER AND NOW, in accordance with the accompanying Memorandum, IT IS ORDERED THAT: 1. Petitioner Bernard Battle’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 is DENIED. 2. The Clerk of Court is directed to CLOSE this case.

, Zz Date: ae COURT: C JUDGE JULIA K. MU United States District Cou

1 Battle named “D. Christensen” as Respondent in this case. However, Battle is currenth confined at USP Canaan, so the appropriate respondent is the warden of that institution. Fernando Garza. (See Doc. 10 at 1 n.1); 28 U.S.C. § 2242; Rumsfeld v. Padilla, 542 U.S. 426. 434-35 (2004); see also 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Rule 2(a). The Court will therefore substitute the appropriate respondent in this matter. See FED. R. Civ. P. 25(d).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Battle v. Christensen, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/battle-v-christensen-pamd-2023.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack