Hazel v. Warden, Chillicothe Correctional Institution
| Michael Hazel |
| Warden, Chillicothe Correctional Institution |
| 3:2013cv00332 |
| September 27, 2013 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Ohio |
| Dayton Office |
| CLARK |
| Timothy S. Black |
| Michael R Merz |
| General |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 |
| None |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
54
DECISION AND ENTRY ADOPTING THE REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE (Docs. 36 , 45 , 47 ). Signed by Judge Timothy S. Black on 9/24/2014. (mr1)
|
|
Filing
47
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS ON OBJECTIONS TO DISCOVERY ORDERS - It is respectfully recommended that the Objections be overruled. Objections to R&R due by 9/26/2014. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael R Merz on 9/9/2014. (kpf1)
|
|
Filing
45
SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS - Based on the foregoing analysis, the Magistrate Judge respectfully again recommends the Petition be dismissed with prejudice. Because reasonable jurists would not disagree with this conclusion, Petitioner should be denied a certificate of appealability and the Court should certify to the Sixth Circuit that any appeal would be objectively frivolous. Objections to R&R due by 9/25/2014. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael R Merz on 9/5/2014. (kpf1)
|
|
Filing
40
DECISION AND ORDER OVERRULING PETITIONER'S SECOND OBJECTIONS TO RESPONDENT'S NOTICE OF FILING - Hazel's Second Objections are OVERRULED. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael R Merz on 8/25/2014. (kpf1)
|
|
Filing
38
DECISION AND ORDER OVERRULING PETITIONER'S OBJECTION TO RESPONDENT'S NOTICE OF FILING. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael R Merz on 8/19/2014. (kpf1)
|
|
Filing
36
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS - It is respectfully recommended that the Petition and Amended Petition herein be dismissed with prejudice. Because reasonable jurists would not disagree with this conclusion, Petitioner should be denied a certificate of appealability and the Court should certify to the Sixth Circuit that any appeal would be objectively frivolous. Objections to R&R due by 9/2/2014. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael R Merz on 8/15/2014. (kpf1)
|
|
Filing
32
DECISION AND ORDER DENYING PETITIONER'S MOTION FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS AND JUDICIAL NOTICE BUT ORDERING EXPANSION OF THE RECORD. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael R Merz on 7/31/2014. (kpf1)
|
|
Filing
22
DECISION AND ORDER on Petitioner's Motion to Expand the Record (Doc. No. 14), Petitioner's Motion to Supplement the State Court Record (Doc. No. 15), Petitioner's Motion for Notice of Filing (Doc. No. 16), Petitioner's Motion for Production of Documents (Doc. No. 18), and Petitioner's Objection to the Magistrate Judge's Decision and Order Denying a second motion to extend time to file a reply (Doc. No. 20). Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael R Merz on 3/31/2014. (kpf1)
|
|
Filing
4
SUPPLEMENTAL ORDER FOR ANSWER re 3 Order, - In consideration of the tender of the filing fee, the Court's sua sponte order permitting in forma pauperis status is VACATED. The Petition labeled "original" shall be scanned and upload ed to the Court's filing system and docketed as "Amended Petition. The "Appellant's Principal Brief" shall be scanned and uploaded to the Court's filing system and docketed as it is labeled; the original thereof shall be returned to Petitioner by the Clerk. Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that Respondent shall, not later than November 15, 2013, file an answer conforming to the requirements of Rule 5 of the Rules Governing §2254 Cases. The Clerk is ordered to serve the Petition on Respondent and the Attorney General of Ohio, c/o Assistant Attorney General M. Scott Criss, Section Coordinator, 150 E. Gay Street, 16TH, Floor, Columbus, Ohio 43215. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael R Merz on 10/01/13. (pb1)
|
|
Filing
3
ORDER for Answer - re 1 The Court sua sponte grants leave to proceed in forma pauperis. Motion to Waive Required Number of Copies - The Clerk is not authorized to make free copies of documents for litigants but is in fact required to charge $. 50 per page for such copies; Motion for Additional Pages - The Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure do not apply to filings in this United States District Court. Motion to Stay - is DENIED; The Clerk is ordered to serve the Petition on Respondent and the Attorney General of Ohio, c/o Assistant Attorney General M. Scott Criss, Section Coordinator, 150 E. Gay Street, 16th Floor, Columbus, Ohio 43215. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael R Merz on 09/30/13. (pb1)(res)(AG)
|
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 Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
| Search for this case: Hazel v. Warden, Chillicothe Correctional Institution | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Respondent: Warden, Chillicothe Correctional Institution | |
| Represented By: | M Scott Criss |
| 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 ] |
| Petitioner: Michael Hazel | |
| 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.
