Stokes v. Kelly

Stokes v. Kelly

Petitioner:	Russell Stokes
Respondent:	Bennie Kelly
Case Number:	1:2009cv00399
Filed:	February 20, 2009
Court:	US District Court for the Northern District of Ohio
Office:	Habeas Corpus (General) Office
County:	Cuyahoga
Presiding Judge:	Peter C. Economus
Presiding Judge:	James S. Gallas
Nature of Suit:	None
Cause of Action:	Federal Question
Jury Demanded By:	28:2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)

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
March 23, 2010	Filing 11 Order Adopting Magistrate Judge James Gallas' Report and Recommendation. Petitioner's petition for a writ of habeas corpus is denied and this case is dismissed (Related document 10 ). Judge Peter C. Economus on 3/23/10. (BR,S)
March 1, 2010	Filing 10 Report and Recommendation re 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (2254) filed by Russell Stokes. Following review of arguments raised in petition and applicable law, petitioner has not demonstrated that he was in custody pursuant to state court judgment that resulted from a decision that is "contrary to" or involved in an "unreasonable application" of federal law as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States. Further there has been no demonstrated need for an evidentiary hearing and the petition for habeas corpus relief under 28 USC Section 2254 should be denied and dismissed. Objections to R&R due by 3/15/2010. Magistrate Judge James S. Gallas on 3/1/2010. (W,G) Modified text on 3/2/2010 (JLG).

Date Filed

Document Text

March 23, 2010

Filing 11 Order Adopting Magistrate Judge James Gallas' Report and Recommendation. Petitioner's petition for a writ of habeas corpus is denied and this case is dismissed (Related document 10 ). Judge Peter C. Economus on 3/23/10. (BR,S)

March 1, 2010

Filing 10 Report and Recommendation re 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (2254) filed by Russell Stokes. Following review of arguments raised in petition and applicable law, petitioner has not demonstrated that he was in custody pursuant to state court judgment that resulted from a decision that is "contrary to" or involved in an "unreasonable application" of federal law as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States. Further there has been no demonstrated need for an evidentiary hearing and the petition for habeas corpus relief under 28 USC Section 2254 should be denied and dismissed. Objections to R&R due by 3/15/2010. Magistrate Judge James S. Gallas on 3/1/2010. (W,G) Modified text on 3/2/2010 (JLG).

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 Ohio Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Stokes v. Kelly
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Petitioner: Russell Stokes
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: Bennie Kelly
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?