Bates v. Oppy

Bates v. Oppy

Petitioner:	Robert Bates
Respondent:	Mick Oppy
Case Number:	1:2014cv00399
Filed:	February 21, 2014
Court:	US District Court for the Northern District of Ohio
Office:	Cleveland Office
County:	Cuyahoga
Presiding Judge:	Benita Y. Pearson
Nature of Suit:	Habeas Corpus (General)
Cause of Action:	28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
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
March 13, 2019	Filing 19 Memorandum of Opinion and Order For the reasons set forth herein, Petitioner's Objections (ECF No. 14 ) are overruled and the Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 10 ) of the Magistrate Judge is again adopted. Petitioner's request f or an evidentiary hearing is denied. Robert Bates' Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus is denied. The Court certifies, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), that an appeal from this decision could not be taken in good faith, and that there is no basis upon which to issue a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c); Fed. R. App. P. 22(b). Judge Benita Y. Pearson on 3/13/2019. (JLG)
May 29, 2015	Filing 11 Memorandum of Opinion and Order For the reasons set forth herein, the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge (ECF No. 10 ) is hereby adopted. Robert Bates's Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus is dismissed.The Court certifi es, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), that an appeal from this decision could not be taken in good faith, and that there is no basis upon which to issue a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c); Fed. R. App. P. 22(b). Judge Benita Y. Pearson on 5/29/2015. (JLG)

Date Filed

Document Text

March 13, 2019

Filing 19 Memorandum of Opinion and Order For the reasons set forth herein, Petitioner's Objections (ECF No. 14 ) are overruled and the Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 10 ) of the Magistrate Judge is again adopted. Petitioner's request f or an evidentiary hearing is denied. Robert Bates' Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus is denied. The Court certifies, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), that an appeal from this decision could not be taken in good faith, and that there is no basis upon which to issue a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c); Fed. R. App. P. 22(b). Judge Benita Y. Pearson on 3/13/2019. (JLG)

May 29, 2015

Filing 11 Memorandum of Opinion and Order For the reasons set forth herein, the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge (ECF No. 10 ) is hereby adopted. Robert Bates's Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus is dismissed.The Court certifi es, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), that an appeal from this decision could not be taken in good faith, and that there is no basis upon which to issue a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c); Fed. R. App. P. 22(b). Judge Benita Y. Pearson on 5/29/2015. (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: Bates v. Oppy
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Petitioner: Robert Bates
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: Mick Oppy
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?