FREEMAN v. CAPOZZA

E.D. Pennsylvania

FREEMAN v. CAPOZZA

DecidedFebruary 8, 2021

Docket2:19-cv-04333

StatusUnknown

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

Bluebook

FREEMAN v. CAPOZZA, (E.D. Pa. 2021).

Pincite

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

CHARLES FREEMAN, : CIVIL ACTION : NO. 19-4333 Petitioner, : v. : : MARK CAPOZZA, et al., : : Respondents. :

ORDER

AND NOW, this 8th day of February, 2021, after careful and independent consideration of the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Marilyn Heffley (ECF No. 37) and Petitioner’s objections thereto (ECF Nos. 40, 42),1 it is hereby ORDERED as follows: 1. The Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 37) is REJECTED in accordance with the accompanying Memorandum; 2. Petitioner’s objections to the Report and Recommendation (ECF Nos. 40, 42) are SUSTAINED in accordance with the accompanying Memorandum; 3. The Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus (ECF No. 1) is GRANTED, and the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania shall

1 The Court undertakes a de novo review of the portions of the Report and Recommendation to which a party has objected. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Cont’l Cas. Co. v. Dominick D’Andrea, Inc., 150 F.3d 245, 250 (3d Cir. 1998). The Court “may accept, reject or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). either release or retry Petitioner within 120 days of entry of this Order; and 4. The Clerk of Court shall mark this case CLOSED.

AND IT IS SO ORDERED.

_/s/ Eduardo C. Robreno_______ EDUARDO C. ROBRENO, J.

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

CHARLES FREEMAN, : CIVIL ACTION : NO. 19-4333 Petitioner, : v. : : MARK CAPOZZA, et al., : : Respondents. :

ORDER

AND NOW, this 8th day of February, 2021, after careful and independent consideration of the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Marilyn Heffley (ECF No. 37) and Petitioner’s objections thereto (ECF Nos. 40, 42),1 it is hereby ORDERED as follows: 1. The Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 37) is REJECTED in accordance with the accompanying Memorandum; 2. Petitioner’s objections to the Report and Recommendation (ECF Nos. 40, 42) are SUSTAINED in accordance with the accompanying Memorandum; 3. The Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus (ECF No. 1) is GRANTED, and the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania shall

1 The Court undertakes a de novo review of the portions of the Report and Recommendation to which a party has objected. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Cont’l Cas. Co. v. Dominick D’Andrea, Inc., 150 F.3d 245, 250 (3d Cir. 1998). The Court “may accept, reject or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). either release or retry Petitioner within 120 days of entry of this Order; and 4. The Clerk of Court shall mark this case CLOSED.

AND IT IS SO ORDERED.

_/s/ Eduardo C. Robreno_______ EDUARDO C. ROBRENO, J.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

FREEMAN v. CAPOZZA, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/freeman-v-capozza-paed-2021.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack