Miller v. Warden, London Correctional Institution

Justia Dockets & Filings Sixth Circuit Ohio Southern District Miller v. Warden, London Correctional Institution

Miller v. Warden, London Correctional Institution

Petitioner:	Ian Miller
Respondent:	Warden, London Correctional Institution
Case Number:	1:2017cv00536
Filed:	August 14, 2017
Court:	US District Court for the Southern District of Ohio
Office:	Cincinnati Office
County:	MADISON
Presiding Judge:	Stephanie K. Bowman
Presiding Judge:	Susan J. Dlott
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 3, 2018	Filing 15 ORDER ADOPTING 11 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS: The Report is ADOPTED and the Petition is ordereddismissed with prejudice. Signed by Judge Susan J. Dlott on 8/3/2018. (jlw)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
June 15, 2018	Filing 11 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS - The Magistrate Judge respectfully recommends the Petition in this case be dismissed with prejudice. Because reasonable jurists would not disagree with this conclusion, Petitioner should be denied a certificate of appeala bility and the Court should certify to the Sixth Circuit that any appeal would be objectively frivolous and therefore should not be permitted to proceed in forma pauperis. Objections to R&R due by 6/29/2018. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz on 6/15/2018. (kpf)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)

Date Filed

Document Text

August 3, 2018

Filing 15 ORDER ADOPTING 11 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS: The Report is ADOPTED and the Petition is ordereddismissed with prejudice. Signed by Judge Susan J. Dlott on 8/3/2018. (jlw)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)

June 15, 2018

Filing 11 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS - The Magistrate Judge respectfully recommends the Petition in this case be dismissed with prejudice. Because reasonable jurists would not disagree with this conclusion, Petitioner should be denied a certificate of appeala bility and the Court should certify to the Sixth Circuit that any appeal would be objectively frivolous and therefore should not be permitted to proceed in forma pauperis. Objections to R&R due by 6/29/2018. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz on 6/15/2018. (kpf)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)

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

Search for this case: Miller v. Warden, London Correctional Institution
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Petitioner: Ian 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: Warden, London Correctional Institution
Represented By:	Mary Anne Reese
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?