HARRIS v. SUTTER

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA COREY L. HARRIS, ) Petitioner, ) C.A. No. 24-65 Erie ) v. ) District Judge Susan Paradise Baxter ) Chief Magistrate Judge Richard Lanzillo WARDEN SUTTER, et al., ) Respondents. ) MEMORANDUM ORDER Petitioner Corey L. Harris, an inmate formerly incarcerated at the Erie County Prison in Erie, Pennsylvania, initiated this action on March 4, 2024, by filing a pro se petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, challenging an Indirect Criminal Complaint (“ICC”) that was filed against him in the Erie County Court of Common Pleas at docket number CP-25-MD-000586-2023. Petitioner claims that the ICC violated his rights under the fourth, fifth, and sixth amendments to the United States Constitution and the “E-Commerce Clause,” and that the Common Pleas Court “lacked jurisdiction.” (ECF No. 10, at pp. 2-5, 8). The petition was referred to Chief United States Magistrate Judge Richard A. Lanzillo, for report and recommendation in accordance with the Magistrate Judges Act, 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), and Rules 72.1.3 and 72.1.4 of the Local Rules for Magistrate Judges.

The state court record indicates that the ICC at issue was filed on October 23, 2023; however, the complaint was later withdrawn by the Commonwealth on June 26, 2024, with the approval of Judge Marshall J. Piccinini of the Erie County Court of Common Pleas. See As the Chief Magistrate Judge correctly notes, because Plaintiff was a pre-trial detainee with regard to the ICC charge at the time he filed the instant petition, his petition is more appropriately analyzed under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. (ECF No. 17, n. 1, citing Dent v. Irwin, 2024 WL 450036, at *1 (W.D. Pa. Feb. 6, 2024)(“While § 2254 applies to post-trial challenges, a state criminal defendant seeking relief before a state judgment has been rendered may proceed pursuant to the more general habeas corpus statute, 28 U.S.C. § 2241, in very limited circumstances”)). .

Commonwealth y. Harris, Docket No. CP-25-MD-000586-2023 (Pa. Ct. Com. Pl. 2023). As a result, the Respondents filed a motion to dismiss the petition in this case as moot, since the withdrawal of the ICC removed any “case or controversy” before this Court. [ECF No. 14].

On July 9, 2025, Chief Magistrate Judge Lanzillo issued a Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) recommending that Respondent’s motion to dismiss be granted, that the instant petition be dismissed with prejudice as moot, and that a Certificate of Appealability be denied. [ECF No. 17]. Objections to the R&R were due to be filed by July 28, 2024; however no timely objections have been received by the Court.

After de novo review of the petition and documents in the case, together with the report and recommendation, the following order is entered: AND NOW, this Ist day of August, 2025; IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Respondent’s motion to dismiss [ECF No. 14] is GRANTED, the within petition for a writ of habeas corpus is DENIED with prejudice as moot, and that a Certificate of Appealability is also DENIED. The report and recommendation of Magistrate Judge Lanzillo, dated July 9, 2025 [ECF No. 17], is adopted as the opinion of this Court. As there are no further matters pending before the Court relative to the instant petition, th Clerk is directed to mark this case “CLOSED.”

SUSAN PARADISE BAXTER United States District Judge ce: The Honorable Richard A. Lanzillo Chief United States Magistrate Judge All parties of record 2 .