Miller v. Marchilli, Jr.

Miller v. Marchilli, Jr.

Petitioner:	David T. Miller
Respondent:	Raymond Marchilli, Jr.
Case Number:	1:2017cv10469
Filed:	March 21, 2017
Court:	US District Court for the District of Massachusetts
Office:	Boston Office
County:	Suffolk
Presiding Judge:	Denise J. Casper
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
January 9, 2019	Filing 37 Judge Denise J. Casper: ORDER entered. MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - The Court DENIES the motion to amend the Petition, D. 35, and the Petition, D.1. Miller may receive a certificate of appealability only if he makes "a substantial showing of the den ial of a constitutional right." 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2). A certificate of appealability is appropriate when "reasonable jurists would find the district court's assessment of the constitutional claims debatable or wrong." Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 338 (2003) (quoting Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2003)) (internal quotation marks omitted). Based upon the analysis of the record and the applicable law in this Memorandum and Order, the Cour t is not, at this juncture, inclined to issue a certificate of appealability, but will give Miller until February 6, 2019 to file a memorandum, not to exceed five (5) pages, if he seeks to address the issue of whether a certificate of appealability is warranted as to the Petition.(Hourihan, Lisa)

Date Filed

Document Text

January 9, 2019

Filing 37 Judge Denise J. Casper: ORDER entered. MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - The Court DENIES the motion to amend the Petition, D. 35, and the Petition, D.1. Miller may receive a certificate of appealability only if he makes "a substantial showing of the den ial of a constitutional right." 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2). A certificate of appealability is appropriate when "reasonable jurists would find the district court's assessment of the constitutional claims debatable or wrong." Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 338 (2003) (quoting Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2003)) (internal quotation marks omitted). Based upon the analysis of the record and the applicable law in this Memorandum and Order, the Cour t is not, at this juncture, inclined to issue a certificate of appealability, but will give Miller until February 6, 2019 to file a memorandum, not to exceed five (5) pages, if he seeks to address the issue of whether a certificate of appealability is warranted as to the Petition.(Hourihan, Lisa)

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: Miller v. Marchilli, Jr.
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Petitioner: David T. Miller
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: Raymond Marchilli, Jr.
Represented By:	Jennifer K. Zalnasky
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?