Picarella v. Wetzel
This text of Picarella v. Wetzel (Picarella v. Wetzel) 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.
Opinion
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
CHARLES T. PICARELLA, JR., : CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:19-CV-382 : Petitioner : (Judge Conner) : v. : : JOHN WETZEL, et al., : : Respondents :
ORDER
AND NOW, this 20th day of January, 2021, upon consideration of the petition for writ of habeas corpus (Doc. 1), and for the reasons set forth in the accompanying memorandum, it is hereby ORDERED that: 1. The petition for writ of habeas corpus (Doc. 1) is DENIED.
2. No certificate of appealability shall issue, as petitioner has failed to demonstrate “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right,” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2); see also Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 335-36 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000).
3. The Clerk of Court is directed to CLOSE this case.
/S/ CHRISTOPHER C. CONNER Christopher C. Conner United States District Judge Middle District of Pennsylvania
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Picarella v. Wetzel, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/picarella-v-wetzel-pamd-2021.