GREEN v. WOLFE

E.D. Pennsylvania

GREEN v. WOLFE

DecidedDecember 3, 2021

Docket2:03-cv-06879

StatusUnknown

This text of GREEN v. WOLFE (GREEN v. WOLFE) 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

GREEN v. WOLFE, (E.D. Pa. 2021).

Pincite

Opinion

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

TYRONE GREEN, : Petitioner, : : v. : CIVIL ACTION NO. 03-CV-6879 : WILLIAM J. WOLFE, et al., : Respondents. :

ORDER

AND NOW, this 3rd day of December, 2021, in consideration of Petitioner Tyrone Green’s Motion for Leave to File a motion pursuant to Rule 60(b) (ECF No. 60), his Petition for Rehearing (ECF No. 61), his Affidavits, Exhibits, Appendices, and Transcripts submitted in support of his Motion (ECF No. 63), and his Motion for the Appointment of Counsel (ECF No. 64), it is ORDERED that: 1. The Motion for Leave to File (ECF No. 60) is denied without prejudice to Green’s right to submit his claims to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit in an application to file a second or successive habeas petition. See 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(3)(A), because this Court does not have subject matter jurisdiction to review a Motion that submits a new claim for relief that is submitted in a motion to reopen judgment. 2. The Motion for the Appointment of Counsel (ECF No. 64) is DENIED as moot. 3. A Certificate of Appealability is DENIED pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c) because reasonable jurists would not debate the propriety of this Court’s procedural ruling with respect to these claims. See Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000). BY THE COURT:

/s/ Gerald Austin McHugh GERALD A. MCHUGH, 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

TYRONE GREEN, : Petitioner, : : v. : CIVIL ACTION NO. 03-CV-6879 : WILLIAM J. WOLFE, et al., : Respondents. :

ORDER

AND NOW, this 3rd day of December, 2021, in consideration of Petitioner Tyrone Green’s Motion for Leave to File a motion pursuant to Rule 60(b) (ECF No. 60), his Petition for Rehearing (ECF No. 61), his Affidavits, Exhibits, Appendices, and Transcripts submitted in support of his Motion (ECF No. 63), and his Motion for the Appointment of Counsel (ECF No. 64), it is ORDERED that: 1. The Motion for Leave to File (ECF No. 60) is denied without prejudice to Green’s right to submit his claims to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit in an application to file a second or successive habeas petition. See 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(3)(A), because this Court does not have subject matter jurisdiction to review a Motion that submits a new claim for relief that is submitted in a motion to reopen judgment. 2. The Motion for the Appointment of Counsel (ECF No. 64) is DENIED as moot. 3. A Certificate of Appealability is DENIED pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c) because reasonable jurists would not debate the propriety of this Court’s procedural ruling with respect to these claims. See Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000). BY THE COURT:

/s/ Gerald Austin McHugh GERALD A. MCHUGH, J.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

GREEN v. WOLFE, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/green-v-wolfe-paed-2021.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack