PRIETO v. BRINKLEY
This text of PRIETO v. BRINKLEY (PRIETO v. BRINKLEY) 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 ANDRE PRIETO : CIVIL ACTION v. NO. 19-4850 JUDGE GENECE E. BRINKLEY, et al.
ORDER AND NOW, this 28" day of July 2020, upon careful and independent consideration of the amended Petition for a writ of habeas corpus (ECF Doc. No. 4), Response to the Petition (ECF Doc. No. 8), Respondent’s Supplements (ECF Doc. No. 12-1 to 12-7), and for reasons in the accompanying Memorandum, it is ORDERED: 1. We DENY and DISMISS the amended Petition for a writ of habeas corpus (ECF Doc. No. 4) with prejudice; 3. We DENY a certificate of appealability;! and, 4. The Clerk of Court shall close this case.
' See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
PRIETO v. BRINKLEY, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/prieto-v-brinkley-paed-2020.