Smith v. Lazaroff

Smith v. Lazaroff

Petitioner:	Taunee Smith
Respondent:	Alan Lazaroff
Case Number:	1:2014cv01702
Filed:	August 4, 2014
Court:	US District Court for the Northern District of Ohio
Office:	Cleveland Office
County:	Cuyahoga
Presiding Judge:	Sara Lioi
Nature of Suit:	Habeas Corpus (General)
Cause of Action:	28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Jury Demanded By:	None

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed	Document Text
February 29, 2016	Filing 19 Memorandum Opinion: The Court has reviewed the Magistrate Judge's report and recommendation, which concludes that petitioner's two grounds are both procedurally defaulted, and accepts the same. Accordingly, the petition for writ of habeas corpus is denied and the case dismissed. Further, the Court certifies that an appeal from this decision could not be taken in good faith and that there is no basis upon which to issue a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. Sections 1915(a)(3), 2253(c); Fed. R. App. P. 22(b). (Related Doc # 14 ). Judge Sara Lioi on 2/29/2016. (P,J)
January 13, 2016	Filing 15 Memorandum Opinion: The Court has reviewed the Magistrate Judge's report and recommendation, which concludes that petitioner's two grounds are both procedurally defaulted, and accepts the same. Accordingly, the petition for writ of habeas corpus is denied and the case dismissed. Further, the Court certifies that an appeal from this decision could not be taken in good faith and that there is no basis upon which to issue a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. Sections 1915(a)(3), 2253(c); Fed. R. App. P. 22(b). (Related Doc # 14 ). Judge Sara Lioi on 1/13/2016. (P,J)

Date Filed

Document Text

February 29, 2016

Filing 19 Memorandum Opinion: The Court has reviewed the Magistrate Judge's report and recommendation, which concludes that petitioner's two grounds are both procedurally defaulted, and accepts the same. Accordingly, the petition for writ of habeas corpus is denied and the case dismissed. Further, the Court certifies that an appeal from this decision could not be taken in good faith and that there is no basis upon which to issue a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. Sections 1915(a)(3), 2253(c); Fed. R. App. P. 22(b). (Related Doc # 14 ). Judge Sara Lioi on 2/29/2016. (P,J)

January 13, 2016

Filing 15 Memorandum Opinion: The Court has reviewed the Magistrate Judge's report and recommendation, which concludes that petitioner's two grounds are both procedurally defaulted, and accepts the same. Accordingly, the petition for writ of habeas corpus is denied and the case dismissed. Further, the Court certifies that an appeal from this decision could not be taken in good faith and that there is no basis upon which to issue a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. Sections 1915(a)(3), 2253(c); Fed. R. App. P. 22(b). (Related Doc # 14 ). Judge Sara Lioi on 1/13/2016. (P,J)

Access additional case information on PACER

Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.

Access this case on the Ohio Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Smith v. Lazaroff
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Petitioner: Taunee Smith
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Finance	[ Google Finance \| Yahoo Finance \| Hoovers \| SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Justia Dockets \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Respondent: Alan Lazaroff
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Finance	[ Google Finance \| Yahoo Finance \| Hoovers \| SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Justia Dockets \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?