Suero v. Kauffman

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA ROGEL SUERO, Petitioner, CIVIL ACTION v. NO. 19-1653 KAUFFMAN, et al., Respondents. ORDER AND NOW, this 30th day of July 2021, upon consideration of Petitioner Rogel Suero’s pro se Revised Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Doc. No. 10), Respondents’ Response in Opposition (Doc. No. 16), the pertinent state court record, and upon review of the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Henry S. Perkin (Doc. No. 32) to which no objections have been filed, it is ORDERED as follows: 1. The Report and Recommendation (Doc. No. 32) is APPROVED and ADOPTED.1 2. The Revised Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. No. 10) is DENIED.

3. A certificate of appealability SHALL NOT issue because “reasonable jurists would [not] find the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims debatable or wrong.” Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); see also 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2). BY THE COURT:

/s/ Joel H. Slomsky JOEL H. SLOMSKY, J.

1 As Magistrate Judge Perkin stated in the Report and Recommendation, Petitioner’s four ineffective assistance of counsel claims and one “cumulative error” claim were all reasonably adjudicated on the merits in state court. (See Doc. No. 32 at 13-15, 18, 21-24.) Accordingly, this Court will approve and adopt the Report and Recommendation (Doc. No. 32).