Thompson v. Warden, Warren Correctional Institution
| Craig A Thompson |
| Warden, Warren Correctional Institution |
| 3:2018cv00117 |
| April 12, 2018 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Ohio |
| Dayton Office |
| MONTGOMERY |
| Michael R. Merz |
| Thomas M. Rose |
| 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
109
CLERK'S JUDGMENT. Signed on 11/3/2020. (kma)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
|
|
Filing
102
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS - It is respectfully recommended that the Petition be dismissed with prejudice. Because reasonable jurists would not disagree with this conclusion, it is also recommended that Petitioner be denied a certificate of appeala bility and that the Court certify to the Sixth Circuit that any appeal would be objectively frivolous and should not be permitted to proceed in forma pauperis. Objections to R&R due by 9/14/2020. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz on 8/31/2020. (kpf)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
|
|
Filing
101
DECISION AND ORDER - The Court having reviewed de novo those portions of the Magistrate Judge's Decision on the Motion to amend to which Defendant has objected, the Court overrules the Objections 100 and affirms the Magistrate Judge's denial of the Motion to Amend. Signed by Judge Thomas M. Rose on 8-10-2020. (de)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
|
|
Filing
99
ORDER denying Petitioner's Motion to the Court for reconsideration of the Magistrate Judge's denial of Petitioner's Motion to Amend Ground Eight 97 . The Magistrate Judge sua sponte extends Thompsons time to object to the Magistrate Judge's most recent decision on reconsideration to and including August 3, 2020. The Magistrate Judge will not treat the case as for ripe for decision until Judge Rose decides any such objections. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz on 7/21/2020. (kpf)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
|
|
Filing
87
DECISION AND ORDER -Petitioner's Motion for Reconsideration 86 is DENIED. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz on 6/26/2020. (kpf)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
|
|
Filing
85
ORDER - Because Petitioner avers he does not have a copy of Defense Exhibit B from trial, Respondent is ordered to obtain and file with this Court, not later than July 1, 2020, an authenticated copy of that exhibit, serving a copy on Petitioner at the time of filing. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz on 6/22/2020. (kpf)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
|
|
Filing
80
DECISION AND ORDER ON MOTION FOR ADDITIONAL DISCOVERY- Without deciding its relevance, the Court GRANTS Petitioners motion to include Defense Exhibit B in this Courts record. Petitioner shall submit a copy of that document forthwith. If Respondent di sputes the authenticity of the copy, he may file an authenticated copy from the Common Pleas Courts records. The balance of Petitioners motion includes arguments which need not be adjudicated todecide if the record should be expanded. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz on 6/12/2020. (kma)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
|
|
Filing
74
DECISION AND ORDER - Petitioner's Motion to Expand the record to include what he has marked as Exhibits E and F is GRANTED. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz on 6/4/2020. (kpf)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
|
|
Filing
64
ORDER DISSOLVING STAY AND SCHEDULING FURTHER FILINGS - Accordingly, the Stay of Proceedings is VACATED. Respondent shall supplement the State Court Record not later than June 1, 2020, as already filed with state court filings after theStay was entere d. Petitioner shall file his reply pleading not later than twenty-one days after the supplemental state court record is filed. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz on 4/24/2020. (kma)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
|
|
Filing
59
ORDER VACATING JUDGMENT AND REINSTATING CASE- To the extent Petitioner disclaims any intent to dismiss the Petition, the Court can easily correct the harm. Accordingly, pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 60, both the Magistrate Judges Decision and Order Granti ng Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 56 ) and the Clekrs Judgment carrying out that Order (ECF No. 57 ) are VACATED. and this case is ordered reinstated on the active docket of this Court. On January 2, 2020, prior to receipt of the spurious Motion to Dis miss, the Magistrate Judge had entered an Analysis of the Current Status of this Case which found the case was not ripe for decision because of the reported pendency of a motion for reconsideration in the Second District Court of Appeals and possible subsequent appeal to the Supreme Court of Ohio (ECF No. 54 ). The Magistrate Judge has confirmed that a motion for reconsideration is in fact pending before the Second District Court of Appeals as of the date of this Order. Accordingly, the status of the case remains as noted in the Analysis: stayed pending the finality of Petitioners currently pending appeal. The Courts prior Order for Status Reports remains in effect.. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz on 2/25/2020. (kma)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
|
|
Filing
56
DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO DISMISS- Accordingly it is hereby ORDERED pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(a)(2), the above-captioned action is hereby dismissed with prejudice. The Clerk will enter judgment in favor of the Respondent and terminate this case on the Courts docket. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz on 2/5/2020. re 55 (kma)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
|
|
Filing
42
ORDER DENYING "REQUEST FOR REMAINDER OF THE RECORD" 41 . Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz on 12/3/2018. (kpf)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
|
|
Filing
37
DECISION AND ORDER DENYING MOTION TO RECONSIDER (ECF No. 34). Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz on 11/21/2018. (kpf)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
|
|
Filing
33
SUPPLEMENTAL DECISION AND ORDER ON MOTION FOR DISCOVERY; CASE STAYED PENDING EXHAUSTION - It is hereby ORDERED, sua sponte, that consideration of the merits of this case be STAYED pending exhaustion of Petitioner's presently pending appeal of the denial of his post-conviction petition to the Ohio Second District Court of Appeals and his further appeal to the Supreme Court of Ohio if the Second District's decision is adverse to his claims. Both parties are ordered to keep this Cour t currently apprised of the status of those appeals. When those appeals are complete, Petitioner may renew his motion for discovery of Defense Exhibit B and/or to expand the record in this Court to include that exhibit. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz on 11/ 13/2018. (kpf)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
|
|
Filing
29
DECISION AND ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR DISCOVERY 25 . Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz on 11/5/2018. (kpf)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
|
|
Filing
14
DECISION AND ORDER DENYING MOTION TO EXPAND THERECORD AND GRANTING EXTENSION OF TIME 13 . Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz on 10/8/2018. (kpf)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
|
|
Filing
5
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR STAY 4 WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz on 4/18/2018. (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: Thompson v. Warden, Warren 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: Craig A Thompson | |
| 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, Warren Correctional Institution | |
| Represented By: | William H Lamb |
| 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.
