Ramirez v. Warden, Madison Correctional Institution

Justia Dockets & Filings Sixth Circuit Ohio Southern District Ramirez v. Warden, Madison Correctional Institution

Ramirez v. Warden, Madison Correctional Institution

Petitioner:	Alexis Ramirez
Respondent:	Warden, Madison Correctional Institution
Case Number:	1:2014cv00299
Filed:	April 10, 2014
Court:	US District Court for the Southern District of Ohio
Office:	Cincinnati Office
County:	MADISON
Presiding Judge:	Sandra S Beckwith
Presiding Judge:	Stephanie K. Bowman
Nature of Suit:	General
Cause of Action:	28 U.S.C. § 2254
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
December 4, 2015	Filing 23 ORDER adopting Report and Recommendation 21 ; overruling the objections; denying and dismissing with prejudice the petition for a writ of habeas corpus. A certificate of appealability will not issue. Petitioner is denied leave to appeal IFP. Signed by Judge Sandra S Beckwith on 12/4/15. (mb)
September 30, 2015	Filing 21 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS - The Petition herein is barred by the statute of limitations and should be dismissed on that basis. Because that defense is conclusive, there is no need to discuss other issues raised by the pleadings. Because reasonable j urists would not disagree with this conclusion, Petitioner should be denied a certificate of appealability and the Court should certify to the Sixth Circuit that any appeal would be objectively frivolous and therefore should not be permitted to proceed in forma pauperis. Objections to R&R due by 10/19/2015. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz on 9/30/2015. (kpf)

Date Filed

Document Text

December 4, 2015

Filing 23 ORDER adopting Report and Recommendation 21 ; overruling the objections; denying and dismissing with prejudice the petition for a writ of habeas corpus. A certificate of appealability will not issue. Petitioner is denied leave to appeal IFP. Signed by Judge Sandra S Beckwith on 12/4/15. (mb)

September 30, 2015

Filing 21 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS - The Petition herein is barred by the statute of limitations and should be dismissed on that basis. Because that defense is conclusive, there is no need to discuss other issues raised by the pleadings. Because reasonable j urists would not disagree with this conclusion, Petitioner should be denied a certificate of appealability and the Court should certify to the Sixth Circuit that any appeal would be objectively frivolous and therefore should not be permitted to proceed in forma pauperis. Objections to R&R due by 10/19/2015. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz on 9/30/2015. (kpf)

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 Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Ramirez v. Warden, Madison Correctional Institution
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Petitioner: Alexis Ramirez
Represented By:	Firooz Taghi Namei
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: Warden, Madison Correctional Institution
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?