Herrera v. Warden Orzen

M.D. Pennsylvania

Herrera v. Warden Orzen

DecidedApril 28, 2023

Docket3:22-cv-01946

StatusUnknown

This text of Herrera v. Warden Orzen (Herrera v. Warden Orzen) 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

Herrera v. Warden Orzen, (M.D. Pa. 2023).

Pincite

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA JEFFREY E. HERRERA, : CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:22-1946 Petitioner : (JUDGE MANNION) Vv. : WARDEN ORZEN, : Respondent :

JEFFREY E. HERRERA., : CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:22-1947 Petitioner : (JUDGE MANNION) V. : PA BD. OF PROB AND PAROLE, : Respondent : ORDER In accordance with this Court’s memorandum issued this same day, IT

IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT: 1. The petitions for writ of habeas corpus (Doc. 1) are DISMISSED. 2. There is no basis for the issuance of a certificate of appealability. See 28 U.S.C. §2253(c).' 3. The Clerk of Court is directed to CLOSE these cases. | 2S TTT 1 Jurists of reason would not debate the procedural or substantive disposition of the Petitioner's claims. See Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 ‘2()00). Therefore, no certificate of ajopezalability will be grartec. See id.

4. Petitioner's motion for relief from judgment (Doc. 15) is DISMISSED as moot. Jif E. MANNION United States District Judge DATE: Aprilay 2023 22-1946-01

-2-

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA JEFFREY E. HERRERA, : CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:22-1946 Petitioner : (JUDGE MANNION) Vv. : WARDEN ORZEN, : Respondent :

JEFFREY E. HERRERA., : CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:22-1947 Petitioner : (JUDGE MANNION) V. : PA BD. OF PROB AND PAROLE, : Respondent : ORDER In accordance with this Court’s memorandum issued this same day, IT

IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT: 1. The petitions for writ of habeas corpus (Doc. 1) are DISMISSED. 2. There is no basis for the issuance of a certificate of appealability. See 28 U.S.C. §2253(c).' 3. The Clerk of Court is directed to CLOSE these cases. | 2S TTT 1 Jurists of reason would not debate the procedural or substantive disposition of the Petitioner's claims. See Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 ‘2()00). Therefore, no certificate of ajopezalability will be grartec. See id.

4. Petitioner's motion for relief from judgment (Doc. 15) is DISMISSED as moot. Jif E. MANNION United States District Judge DATE: Aprilay 2023 22-1946-01

-2-

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Herrera v. Warden Orzen, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/herrera-v-warden-orzen-pamd-2023.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack