Harris II v. State Of Ohio
| Ronald Harris II |
| State Of Ohio |
| 3:2015cv00179 |
| May 15, 2015 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Ohio |
| Dayton Office |
| MONTGOMERY |
| Michael R. Merz |
| Thomas M. Rose |
| Motions to Vacate Sentence |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 |
| None |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
26
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that Petitioners Motion to Enter 28 USCS & 2347 & 1338 (ECF No. 17 ) is DENIED. Signed by Judge Thomas M. Rose on 3/3/23. (pb)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
|
|
Filing
18
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS - Petitioner's "Motion to Enter 28 USCS & 2347 & 1338" (ECF No. 17) is plainly untimely and should be denied on that basis. Objections to R&R due by 2/21/2023. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz on 2/7/2023. (kpf)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
|
|
Filing
11
ENTRY AND ORDER OVERRULING OBJECTIONS 10 , ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS 8 AND TERMINATING CASE. The Court dismissed this case for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, as reasonable jurists would not agree with this conclusion, the Court den ies a certificate of appealability to Petitioner and certifies to the Sixth Circuit that any appeal would be objectively frivolous and therefore Petitioner should not be permitted to proceed in forma pauperis. Signed by Judge Thomas M. Rose on 10-14-2015. (de)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
|
|
Filing
8
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS - It is respectfully recommended that this case be dismissed for want of subject matter jurisdiction under Burton v. Stewart, 549 U.S. 147 (2007). Because reasonable jurists would not disagree with this conclusion, Petitio ner 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 8/14/2015. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz on 7/28/2015. (kpf)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
|
|
Filing
6
ORDER - On Petitioner's Motion to Extend Time (Doc. No. 5), it is hereby ORDERED; 1. The Report and Recommendations of June 11, 2015 (Doc. No. 4) is WITHDRAWN; 2. The time within which Petitioner must comply with the Court's Order to file a n actual petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 is EXTENDED to and including August 1, 2015. The Court notes that Petitioner had already paid the required $5.00 filing fee. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz on 6/12/2015. (kpf)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
|
|
Filing
4
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS - It is respectfully recommended that this case be dismissed without prejudice for want of prosecution. Objections to R&R due by 6/29/2015. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz on 6/11/2015. (kpf)(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
| Search for this case: Harris II v. State Of Ohio | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Petitioner: Ronald Harris II | |
| 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: State Of Ohio | |
| 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.
