Jordan v. Warden, Madison Correctional Institution et al
Eric Sean Jordan |
Warden, Madison Correctional Institution and Mike DeWine |
2:2015cv00629 |
February 18, 2015 |
US District Court for the Southern District of Ohio |
Columbus Office |
HARRISON |
James L Graham |
Terence P Kemp |
General |
28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 |
None |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 3 ORDER denying 1 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis. It is accordingly ORDERED that this case be transferred to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit to determine whether Petitioner should be permitted to file a second habeas corpus petition. Case Terminated ( Show Cause Response due by 4/27/2015.); adopting Report and Recommendations re 2 Report and Recommendations. Signed by Judge James L Graham on 3/26/2015. (ds)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.) |
Filing 2 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION: The Magistrate Judge RECOMMENDS the instant petition for a writ of habeas corpus be TRANSFERRED to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit as a successive petition - objections due within fourteen (14) days. Signed by Magistrate Judge Terence P Kemp on 2/20/2015. (agm1)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.) |
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 Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
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.