GAYNOR v. HOLLIBAUGH

E.D. Pennsylvania

GAYNOR v. HOLLIBAUGH

DecidedFebruary 10, 2025

Docket2:23-cv-03562

StatusUnknown

This text of GAYNOR v. HOLLIBAUGH (GAYNOR v. HOLLIBAUGH) 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

GAYNOR v. HOLLIBAUGH, (E.D. Pa. 2025).

Pincite

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA Corey Gaynor, Petitioner, CIVIL ACTION v. Nos. 23-3562; 23-3708 Kenneth Holibaugh, et al., Respondents. ORDER AND NOW, this 10th day of February 2025, upon careful and independent consideration of the pleadings (ECF Nos. 1 and 121 and ECF No. 1 in Case 23-3708) and state-court records (ECF Nos. 12-3–12-21), and after review of the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Carol Sandra Moore Wells (ECF No. 13) and Petitioner’s objections thereto (ECF No. 14), it is hereby ORDERED that: 1. The objections are OVERRULED;

2. The Report and Recommendation is APPROVED and ADOPTED; 3. The Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus is DENIED and DISMISSED; 4. A certificate of appealability SHALL NOT issue, in that the Petitioner has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right nor demonstrated that reasonable jurists would debate the correctness of the procedural aspects of this decision. See 28 U.S.C. 2253(c)(2); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); and

5. The Clerk of Court shall mark this case CLOSED for statistical purposes.

1 Unless otherwise noted, citations to ECF Numbers correspond to the docket in case 23-3562. BY THE COURT:

/s/ Gerald J. Pappert GERALD J. PAPPERT, 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 Corey Gaynor, Petitioner, CIVIL ACTION v. Nos. 23-3562; 23-3708 Kenneth Holibaugh, et al., Respondents. ORDER AND NOW, this 10th day of February 2025, upon careful and independent consideration of the pleadings (ECF Nos. 1 and 121 and ECF No. 1 in Case 23-3708) and state-court records (ECF Nos. 12-3–12-21), and after review of the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Carol Sandra Moore Wells (ECF No. 13) and Petitioner’s objections thereto (ECF No. 14), it is hereby ORDERED that: 1. The objections are OVERRULED;

2. The Report and Recommendation is APPROVED and ADOPTED; 3. The Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus is DENIED and DISMISSED; 4. A certificate of appealability SHALL NOT issue, in that the Petitioner has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right nor demonstrated that reasonable jurists would debate the correctness of the procedural aspects of this decision. See 28 U.S.C. 2253(c)(2); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); and

5. The Clerk of Court shall mark this case CLOSED for statistical purposes.

1 Unless otherwise noted, citations to ECF Numbers correspond to the docket in case 23-3562. BY THE COURT:

/s/ Gerald J. Pappert GERALD J. PAPPERT, J.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

GAYNOR v. HOLLIBAUGH, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gaynor-v-hollibaugh-paed-2025.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack