Oglesby v. Warden, Lebanon Correctional Institution

Justia Dockets & Filings Sixth Circuit Ohio Southern District Oglesby v. Warden, Lebanon Correctional Institution

Oglesby v. Warden, Lebanon Correctional Institution

Defendant:	Warden Lebanon Correctional Institution
Petitioner:	Bryan Oglesby
Case Number:	3:2017cv00021
Filed:	January 20, 2017
Court:	US District Court for the Southern District of Ohio
Office:	Dayton Office
County:	MONTGOMERY
Presiding Judge:	Michael R. Merz
Presiding Judge:	Walter H. Rice
Nature of Suit:	General
Cause of Action:	28 U.S.C. § 2241
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
February 14, 2017	Filing 3 DECISION AND ENTRY ADOPTING UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS (DOC. # 2 ); DISMISSING WITH PREJUDICE PETITION UNDER 28 U.S.C. § 2254 FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS (DOC. # 1 ); JUDGMENT TO ENTER IN FAVOR OF RESPONDENT AND AGAINST PETITIONER; DENYING CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY AND LEAVE TO APPEAL IN FORMA PAUPERIS; TERMINATION ENTRY. Signed by Judge Walter H. Rice on 2/14/17. (pb)
January 23, 2017	Filing 2 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS - Because Mr. Oglesby's sole ground for relief is procedurally defaulted, his Petition should be DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. Because reasonable jurists would not disagree with this conclusion, Petitioner should be deni ed 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 2/6/2017. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz on 1/23/2017. (kpf)

Date Filed

Document Text

February 14, 2017

Filing 3 DECISION AND ENTRY ADOPTING UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS (DOC. # 2 ); DISMISSING WITH PREJUDICE PETITION UNDER 28 U.S.C. § 2254 FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS (DOC. # 1 ); JUDGMENT TO ENTER IN FAVOR OF RESPONDENT AND AGAINST PETITIONER; DENYING CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY AND LEAVE TO APPEAL IN FORMA PAUPERIS; TERMINATION ENTRY. Signed by Judge Walter H. Rice on 2/14/17. (pb)

January 23, 2017

Filing 2 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS - Because Mr. Oglesby's sole ground for relief is procedurally defaulted, his Petition should be DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. Because reasonable jurists would not disagree with this conclusion, Petitioner should be deni ed 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 2/6/2017. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz on 1/23/2017. (kpf)

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: Oglesby v. Warden, Lebanon 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: Bryan Oglesby
Represented By:	Charles W. Slicer, III
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 ]
Defendant: Warden Lebanon Correctional Institution
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?