BAILEY v. OBERLANDER ( 2020 )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA NATHANIEL BAILEY, : CIVIL ACTION : NO. 20-4081 Petitioner, : v. : : OBERLANDER, et al., : : Respondents. : ORDER AND NOW, this 17th day of December, 2020, after careful and independent consideration of Nathaniel Bailey’s Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus (ECF No. 2), the Respondents’ Memorandum Addressing Statute of Limitations (ECF No. 10), and the Report and Recommendation of U.S. Magistrate Judge Richard A. Lloret (ECF No. 12), it is hereby ORDERED that: 1. The Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Richard A. Lloret is APPROVED and ADOPTED; 2. Mr. Bailey’s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus is DENIED and DISMISSED with prejudice by separate Judgment, filed contemporaneously with this Order. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 58(a); Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases in the United States District Courts, Rule 12; 3. No certificate of appealability shall issue under 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A) because “the applicant has [not] made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right[,]” under 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2), since he has not demonstrated that “reasonable jurists” would find the Court’s “assessment of the constitutional claims debatable or wrong.” Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); see United States v. Cepro, 224 F.3d 256, 262–63 (3d Cir. 2000), abrograted on other grounds by Gonzalez v. Thaler, 565 U.S. 134 (2012); and 4. The Clerk of Courts shall mark this file closed. AND IT IS SO ORDERED. __/s/ Eduardo C. Robreno_________ EDUARDO C. ROBRENO, J.