McKinnon v. Ryan

McKinnon v. Ryan

Petitioner:	Matthew McKinnon
Respondent:	Kelly Ryan
Case Number:	1:2014cv12005
Filed:	May 2, 2014
Court:	US District Court for the District of Massachusetts
Office:	Boston Office
County:	Middlesex
Presiding Judge:	Patti B. Saris
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
August 7, 2017	Filing 25 Chief Judge Patti B. Saris: ORDER entered. I adopt the report and recommendation issued on April 11, 2017. On June 22, 2017, the Supreme Court issued Weaver v. Massachusetts, which held: [W]hen a defendant raises a public-trial violat ion via an ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claim, Strickland prejudice is not shown automatically. Instead, the burden is on the defendant to show either a reasonable probability of a different outcome in his or her case or... to show that the part icular public-trial violation was so serious as to render his or her trial fundamentally unfair. 37 S. Ct. 1899, 1911 (2017). Petitioner has not shown either prejudice or fundamental unfairness in the circumstances of this case.The petition for ha beas corpus relief (Docket No. 1) is DENIED. I DENY a certificate of appealability pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c) on all objections because Petitioner has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. (Geraldino-Karasek, Clarilde)

Date Filed

Document Text

August 7, 2017

Filing 25 Chief Judge Patti B. Saris: ORDER entered. I adopt the report and recommendation issued on April 11, 2017. On June 22, 2017, the Supreme Court issued Weaver v. Massachusetts, which held: [W]hen a defendant raises a public-trial violat ion via an ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claim, Strickland prejudice is not shown automatically. Instead, the burden is on the defendant to show either a reasonable probability of a different outcome in his or her case or... to show that the part icular public-trial violation was so serious as to render his or her trial fundamentally unfair. 37 S. Ct. 1899, 1911 (2017). Petitioner has not shown either prejudice or fundamental unfairness in the circumstances of this case.The petition for ha beas corpus relief (Docket No. 1) is DENIED. I DENY a certificate of appealability pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c) on all objections because Petitioner has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. (Geraldino-Karasek, Clarilde)

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

Search for this case: McKinnon v. Ryan
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Petitioner: Matthew McKinnon
Represented By:	Donald A. Harwood
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: Kelly Ryan
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?