From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Reid v. Lawler

United States District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
Mar 25, 2010
CIVIL ACTION No. 08-5674 (E.D. Pa. Mar. 25, 2010)
Download
PDF
Check
Treatment

Summary

stating "this Court reviews de novo only the findings of the [Report and Recommendation] that Petitioner specifically objects to" and declines to review arguments that "are essentially a repetition of the arguments set forth in Petitioner's habeas petition"

Summary of this case from Pellicano v. Office of Pers. Mgmt.
See 4 Summaries

Opinion

CIVIL ACTION No. 08-5674.

March 25, 2010

ORDER

MICHAEL BAYLSON, District Judge

AND NOW, this 25th Day of March, 2010, for the reasons set forth above, it is hereby ORDERED as follows:

1. The Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Arnold C. Rapoport, dated October 29, 2009 (Doc. No. 29), is APPROVED and ADOPTED.
2. The Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. No. 1) is DENIED with prejudice and DISMISSED without and evidentiary hearing.
3. There is no probable cause to issue a certificate of appealability.
4. The Clerk shall close this case.

Summaries of

Reid v. Lawler

United States District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
Mar 25, 2010
CIVIL ACTION No. 08-5674 (E.D. Pa. Mar. 25, 2010)

stating "this Court reviews de novo only the findings of the [Report and Recommendation] that Petitioner specifically objects to" and declines to review arguments that "are essentially a repetition of the arguments set forth in Petitioner's habeas petition"

Summary of this case from Pellicano v. Office of Pers. Mgmt.

stating “this Court reviews de novo only the findings of the [Report and Recommendation] that Petitioner specifically objects to” and declines to review arguments that “are essentially a repetition of the arguments set forth in Petitioner's habeas petition”

Summary of this case from In re Pellicano

stating "this Court reviews de novo only the findings of the [Report and Recommendation] that Petitioner specifically objects to" and declines to review arguments that "are essentially a repetition of the arguments set forth in Petitioner's habeas petition"

Summary of this case from Pellicano v. Office of Personnel Mgmt., Ins. Operations

stating that "this Court reviews de novo only the findings of the R R that Petitioner specifically objects to" and declining to review arguments that "are essentially a repetition of the arguments set forth in Petitioner's habeas petition"

Summary of this case from Bell v. Jones
Case details for

Reid v. Lawler

Case Details

Full title:PERCY REID, a/k/a Percy Rock, Petitioner, v. R.M. LAWLER, ET AL.…

Court:United States District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania

Date published: Mar 25, 2010

Citations

CIVIL ACTION No. 08-5674 (E.D. Pa. Mar. 25, 2010)

Citing Cases

United States v. Poltonowicz

In response, the challenger may file objections to the magistrate judge's report and recommendation that…

Peroza-Benitez v. Lawler

In the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, Local Rule 72.1.IV(b) governs a petitioner's objections to a…

10 Citing Cases