Leon v. Parris

Leon v. Parris

Petitioner:	David Enrique Leon
Respondent:	Mike Parris
Case Number:	3:2015cv00094
Filed:	January 30, 2015
Court:	US District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee
Office:	Nashville Office
County:	Davidson
Presiding Judge:	Kevin H. Sharp
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
November 16, 2015	Filing 56 ORDER: Before the Court are (1) the petitioner's Rule 60 motion to vacate the Court's prior order dismissing his habeas petition (ECF No. 42 ) and (2) the petitioner's motion to amend and correct the previously filed Rule 60 motion to vacate judgment (ECF No. 43 ), which the Court also construes as an amended motion to vacate. The motion to amend and correct the previously filed Rule 60 motion is GRANTED. However, for the reasons set forth in the accompanying Memorandum Opi nion, the original motion to vacate (ECF No. 42 ) and the amended motion to vacate (ECF No. 43 ) are DENIED. Because no reasonable jurist would conclude that the petitioner's arguments have merit, the Court DENIES a certificate of appealab ility. Rule 11, Rules Gov'g § 2254 Cases. The Clerk is DIRECTED to ensure that the Sixth Circuit receives notice of this order. It is so ORDERED. Signed by Chief Judge Kevin H. Sharp on 11/16/2015. (xc:Pro se party by regular and certified mail & 6CCA by e-mail.)(hb)
July 16, 2015	Filing 33 MEMORANDUM signed by Chief Judge Kevin H. Sharp on 7/16/2015. (xc:Pro se party by regular and certified mail.)(DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(hb)

Date Filed

Document Text

November 16, 2015

Filing 56 ORDER: Before the Court are (1) the petitioner's Rule 60 motion to vacate the Court's prior order dismissing his habeas petition (ECF No. 42 ) and (2) the petitioner's motion to amend and correct the previously filed Rule 60 motion to vacate judgment (ECF No. 43 ), which the Court also construes as an amended motion to vacate. The motion to amend and correct the previously filed Rule 60 motion is GRANTED. However, for the reasons set forth in the accompanying Memorandum Opi nion, the original motion to vacate (ECF No. 42 ) and the amended motion to vacate (ECF No. 43 ) are DENIED. Because no reasonable jurist would conclude that the petitioner's arguments have merit, the Court DENIES a certificate of appealab ility. Rule 11, Rules Gov'g § 2254 Cases. The Clerk is DIRECTED to ensure that the Sixth Circuit receives notice of this order. It is so ORDERED. Signed by Chief Judge Kevin H. Sharp on 11/16/2015. (xc:Pro se party by regular and certified mail & 6CCA by e-mail.)(hb)

July 16, 2015

Filing 33 MEMORANDUM signed by Chief Judge Kevin H. Sharp on 7/16/2015. (xc:Pro se party by regular and certified mail.)(DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(hb)

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 Tennessee Middle District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Leon v. Parris
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Petitioner: David Enrique Leon
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: Mike Parris
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?