Alford v. United States of America
| Brian Keith Alford |
| United States of America |
| 3:2016cv00412 |
| September 27, 2016 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Ohio |
| Dayton Office |
| MONTGOMERY |
| Michael R. Merz |
| Walter H. Rice |
| General |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 2241 |
| 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
10
DECISION AND ENTRY ADOPTING UNITED STATES MAGISTRATEJUDGE'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS (DOC. # 2 ) ANDSUPPLEMENTAL REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS (DOC. # 5 ); OVERRULING PETITIONER'S OBJECTIONS THERETO (DOCS. ## 3 , 6 ); DISMISSING WITH PR EJUDICE PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (DOC. # 1 ); OVERRULING PETITIONER'S OBJECTIONS TO DENIAL OF MOTION TO AMEND (DOC. # 9 ); JUDGMENT TO ENTER IN FAVOR OF RESPONDENT AND AGAINST PETITIONER; DENYING C ERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY AND LEAVE TO APPEAL IN FORMA PAUPERIS; TERMINATION ENTRY. Signed by Judge Walter H. Rice on 12/14/2016. (srb)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
|
|
Filing
5
SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS - Having reviewed the case in light of the Objections, the Magistrate Judge again respectfully recommends the Petition be dismissed with prejudice. Because reasonable jurists would not disagree with this conclu sion, Petitioner should be denied a certificate of appealability 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 11/4/2016. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz on 10/18/2016. (kpf)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
|
|
Filing
2
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS - Because this Court lacks jurisdiction to proceed under 28 U.S.C. § 2241, the Petition should be dismissed with prejudice. Because reasonable jurists would not disagree with this conclusion, Petitioner should be denie d a certificate of appealability 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 10/14/2016. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz on 9/27/2016. (kpf)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
|
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: Alford v. United States of America | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Petitioner: Brian Keith Alford | |
| 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: United States of America | |
| 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.
