Toussaint v. Klem (3rd Cir. 2005)
Federal Circuits, 3rd Cir. (May 16, 2005)
Docket number: 05-1580
Permanent Link:
http://vlex.com/vid/toussaint-v-klem-19778540
Id. vLex: VLEX-19778540
Click here to download this article in graphic format (Acrobat Reader)
Document language
Search in this document
Document options
U.S. Court of Appeals for the 3rd Cir. - Vincent James Landano v. John J. Rafferty, Superintendent, Rahway State Prison, Irwin I. Kimmelman, Attorney General of the State of New Jersey. State of New Jersey, John J. Rafferty, Superintendent, East New Jersey State Prison, Robert Del Tufo, Attorney General of State of New Jersey, Appellants. Vincent James Landano v. John J. Rafferty, Superintendent, East Jersey State Prison, Peter Perretti, Attorney General, State of New Jersey, Leslie Fay Schwartz, Deputy Attorney General, the Office of the Hudson County Prosecutor; Kearny Police Department, Newark Police Department, Jersey City Police Department, and Perth Amboy Police Department, State of New Jersey, John J. Rafferty, Superintendent East New Jersey State Prison, Robert Del Tufo, Attorney General of State of New Jersey, Appellants. John J. Rafferty, Superintendent, East New Jersey State Prison, and Robert Del Tufo, Attorney General of the State of New Jersey, Appellants, v. Vincent James Landano., 970 F.2d 1230 (3rd Cir. 1992) Superintendent, Rahway State Prison, Irwin I. Kimmelman, Attorney General of the State of New Jersey. State of New Jersey, John J. Rafferty, Superintendent, East New Jersey State Prison, Robert Del Tufo, Attorney General of State of New Jersey, Appellants. Vincent James Landano v. John J. Rafferty, Superintendent, East Jersey State Prison, Peter Perretti, Attorney General, State of New Jersey, Leslie Fay Schwartz, Deputy Attorney General, the Office of the Hudson County Prosecutor; Kearny Police Department, Newark Police Department, Jersey City Police Department, and Perth Amboy Police Department, State of New Jersey, John J. Rafferty, Superintendent East New Jersey State Prison, Robert Del Tufo, Attorney General of State of New Jersey, Appellants. John J. Rafferty, Superintendent, East New Jersey State Prison, and Robert Del Tufo, Attorney General of the State of New Jersey, Appellants, v. Vincent James Landano.
DPS-197 NOT PRECEDENTIAL
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT NO. 05-1580 PATRICK TOUSSAINT, Appellant v. EDWARD KLEM, SUPERINTENDENT; THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF THE COUNTY OF PHILADELPHIA; THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA On Appeal From the United States District Court For the Eastern District of Pennsylvania (D.C. Civ. No. 03-cv-00927) District Judge: Honorable James McGirr Kelly Submitted Under Third Circuit L.A.R. 27.4 and I.O.P. 10.6 April 14, 2005 Before: ROTH, BARRY and SMITH, Circuit Judges (Filed: May 16, 2005) OPINION PER CURIAM Patrick Toussaint appeals from a District Court order dismissing a motion for bail pending appeal. Because no substantial question is presented, we will summarily affirm. See L.A.R. 27.4. In 1996, Toussaint was convicted of several counts of rape and one count each of kidnaping and involuntary deviate sexual intercourse. He was sentenced to seven to twenty years imprisonment. In October of 2002, Toussaint filed a petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 asserting four claims for relief. The District Court denied the petition and Toussaint appealed. On December 21, 2004, we denied a certificate of appealability (COA) and terminated the proceedings. See Toussaint v. Klem, C.A. No. 04-2073. In early 2005, Toussaint petitioned this Court to reconsider the denial of the COA. The petition is still currently pending. Meanwhile, on January 24, 2005, Toussaint moved the District Court for bail pending appeal. The District Court dismissed the motion with prejudice because we denied a COA and the case was closed.1 We exercise plenary review over the denial of bail pending appeal. See United States v. Smith, 793 F.2d 85, 87 (3d Cir. 1986). Toussaint not only fails to show any "extraordinary circumstances" requiring bail pending appeal, see Landano v. Rafferty, 970 F.2d 1230, 1239 (3d Cir. 1992) (citations omitted) (providing the standard), but he fails to present any argument even remotely relating to bail. Accordingly, because no substantial question is presented, we will summarily affirm the order of the District Court. 1 We have jurisdiction to hear this appeal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291.Try vLex for FREE for 3 days
Access legal information from United States including:
- Constitutions
- Forms and Contracts
- Legal Books and Journals
- Case Law
- News and Business
- Regulations
- U.S. Code
Try vLex without any commitment for 3 days and see why you need it.
3
days of Free Access
