Brown v. Warden, London Correctional Institute
Petitioner: Larry E Brown, II
Respondent: Warden, London Correctional Institute
Case Number: 3:2020cv00113
Filed: March 20, 2020
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of Ohio
Presiding Judge: Douglas R Cole
Referring Judge: Michael R Merz
Nature of Suit: Habeas Corpus (General)
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254
Jury Demanded By: None
RSS 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
June 27, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 66 ORDER AND ENTRY: (1) ADOPTING THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE (Doc. No. 64 ); (2) DENYING WITH PREJUDICE PETITIONERS MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION (Doc. No. 63 ); (3) OVERRULING PETITIONERS OBJECTION (Doc. No. 65 ) ; (4) DENYING A CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY; (5) CERTIFYING THAT ANY APPEAL WOULD BE OBJECTIVELY FRIVOLOUS AND FINDING THAT IN FORMA PAUPERIS STATUS SHOULD BE DENIED ON APPEAL; AND (6) CLARIFYING THAT THIS CASE REMAINS TERMINATED ON THE DOCKET. Signed by Judge Michael J. Newman on 6/27/2022. (srb)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
June 3, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 64 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION ON MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION - Petitioner's Motion for Reconsideration (ECF No. 63) should be DENIED. Objections to R&R due by 6/17/2022. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz on 6/3/2022. (kpf)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
May 9, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 59 ORDER AND ENTRY: (1) ADOPTING THE TWO REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE (Doc. Nos. 43 , 47 ); (2) OVERRULING PETITIONERS OBJECTIONS (Doc. Nos. 44 , 55 , 58 ); (3) DENYING PETITIONER'S PETITION FOR WRIT OF HAB EAS CORPUS (Doc. No. 3 ) WITH PREJUDICE; (4) DENYING A CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY; (5) CERTIFYING THAT ANY APPEAL WOULD BE OBJECTIVELY FRIVOLOUS AND FINDING THAT IN FORMA PAUPERIS STATUS SHOULD BE DENIED ON APPEAL; AND (6) TERMINATING THIS CASE ON THE DOCKET. Signed by Judge Michael J. Newman on 5/9/2022. (srb)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
August 6, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 47 SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS - Brown's Objections do not show that the Report contains clearly erroneous findings of fact or errors of law. It is therefore respectfully recommended that the Objections be overruled and that the Peti tion be dismissed with prejudice. Because reasonable jurists would not disagree with this conclusion, it is also recommended that Petitioner be denied a certificate of appealability and that the Court certify to the Sixth Circuit that any appeal wo uld be objectively frivolous and should not be permitted to proceed in forma pauperis. Objections to R&R due by 8/20/2021. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz on 8/6/2021. (srb)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
June 16, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 43 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS - The Magistrate Judge respectfully recommends that the Petition herein be dismissed with prejudice. Because reasonable jurists would not disagree with this conclusion, it is also recommended that Petitioner be denied a c ertificate of appealability 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 6/30/2021. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz on 6/16/2021. (kpf)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
April 28, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 33 ORDER: (1) ADOPTING THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE (DOC. NO. 31 ); (2) OVERRULING PETITIONER'S OBJECTIONS (DOC. NO. 32 ); AND (3) DENYING PETITIONER'S MOTION TO RECONSIDER (DOC. NO. 30 ). Signed by Judge Michael J. Newman on 4/28/2021. (srb)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
April 9, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 31 DECISION AND ORDER ON RECONSIDERATION - Petitioner's Motion for Reconsideration 30 is DENIED. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz on 4/9/2021. (kpf)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
March 31, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 5 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS; ORDER DENYING MOTION TO STAY AS MOOT- Based on the foregoing analysis, it is respectfully recommended that the Petition herein be dismissed with prejudice as barred by the statute of limitations. In light of that recommend ation, the Motion to Stay is denied as moot. Because reasonable jurists would not disagree with this conclusion, it is also recommended that Petitioner be denied a certificate of appealability 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. The Clerk shall serve a copy of this Report on Petitioner and on Brian Higgins at the Office of the Ohio Attorney General. Objections to R&R due by 4/14/2020. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz on 3/31/2020. (kma)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
March 23, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 2 ORDER TO FILE PETITION - Before this Court can grant a stay under Rhines, it must actually have a pending petition. Accordingly, Petitioner Brown is ordered to file his petition immediately. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz on 3/20/2020. (kma)(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: Brown v. Warden, London Correctional Institute
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: Larry E Brown, II
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 Institute
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?