Harrison v. Parris

Harrison v. Parris

Petitioner:	Freeman Ray Harrison
Respondent:	Michael Parris
Case Number:	3:2016cv00565
Filed:	March 14, 2016
Court:	US District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee
Office:	Nashville Office
County:	Rutherford
Presiding Judge:	Waverly D. Crenshaw
Nature of Suit:	General
Cause of Action:	28 U.S.C. § 2254
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
November 8, 2016	Filing 30 ORDER DISMISSING CASE: As set forth in the accompanying Memorandum, Petitioner is not entitled to relief under § 2254 on any of his claims. Accordingly, the petition is hereby DENIED, and this action is DISMISSED with prejudice. The Court GRA NTS a COA only with respect to Claim 1. Petitioner's remaining claims are both procedurally defaulted and without merit. Because reasonable jurists could not debate whether Petitioner is entitled to relief on Claims 2 or 3, the Court DENIES a COA with respect to those claims. Petitioner may still seek a COA directly from the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals. Rule 11(a), Rules Gov'g § 2254 Cases. IT IS SO ORDERED. Signed by District Judge Waverly D. Crenshaw, Jr on 11/8/2016. (xc:Pro se party by regular and certified mail.)(DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(hb)

Date Filed

Document Text

November 8, 2016

Filing 30 ORDER DISMISSING CASE: As set forth in the accompanying Memorandum, Petitioner is not entitled to relief under § 2254 on any of his claims. Accordingly, the petition is hereby DENIED, and this action is DISMISSED with prejudice. The Court GRA NTS a COA only with respect to Claim 1. Petitioner's remaining claims are both procedurally defaulted and without merit. Because reasonable jurists could not debate whether Petitioner is entitled to relief on Claims 2 or 3, the Court DENIES a COA with respect to those claims. Petitioner may still seek a COA directly from the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals. Rule 11(a), Rules Gov'g § 2254 Cases. IT IS SO ORDERED. Signed by District Judge Waverly D. Crenshaw, Jr on 11/8/2016. (xc:Pro se party by regular and certified mail.)(DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(hb)

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 Tennessee Middle District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Harrison v. Parris
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Petitioner: Freeman Ray Harrison
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: Michael Parris
Represented By:	Keith Hollingshead-Cook
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?