FULTON v. SMITH
This text of FULTON v. SMITH (FULTON v. SMITH) 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.
Opinion
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
DENNIS FULTON, Plaintiff, CIVIL ACTION v. NO. 20-3916 BARRY SMITH, et al., Defendants. ORDER
AND NOW, this 16th day of October 2024, upon consideration of Petitioner Dennis
Fulton’s pro se Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Doc. No. 1), the Government’s Response in Opposition (Doc. No. 45), the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Scott W. Reid (Doc. No. 46), Petitioner’s Objections to the Report and Recommendation (Doc. No. 48), the relevant state court record, and in accordance with the Opinion of the Court issued this day, it is ORDERED that: 1. The Report and Recommendation (Doc. No. 46) is APPROVED and ADOPTED. 2. Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. No. 1) is DENIED. 3. A Certificate of Appealability SHALL NOT issue because, based on the analysis contained in the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation, as approved and adopted by this Court, a reasonable jurist could not conclude that the Court is incorrect in denying and dismissing the Habeas Petition. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473 (2000). 4. The Clerk of Court shall mark this case closed.
BY THE COURT:
/s/ Joel H. Slomsky___ JOEL H. SLOMSKY, J.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
FULTON v. SMITH, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fulton-v-smith-paed-2024.