From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Turner v. Hudson

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION AT COLUMBUS
Mar 22, 2013
Case No. 2:07-cv-595 (S.D. Ohio Mar. 22, 2013)

Opinion

Case No. 2:07-cv-595

03-22-2013

MICHAEL R. TURNER, Petitioner, v. STUART HUDSON, Warden, Respondent.


District Judge Timothy S. Black

Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz


ORDER DECLARING PENDING REPORTS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS MOOT

On March 21, 2013, the Court overruled Objections by Respondent to the Order (Doc. No. 165) and Supplemental Opinion (Doc. No. 175) of Magistrate Judge Merz allowing Petitioner to file an amended petition and ordered that the amended petition be filed forthwith (Doc. No. 204). The result of that Order is that Magistrate Judge Merz's Report and Recommendations on the merits (Doc. No. 135) and his Supplemental Report and Recommendations on the Merits and on Petitioner's Motion for Certificate of Appealability (Doc. No. 152) are not ripe for review on objections because the Reports and Recommendations are not complete. S. D. Ohio Crim. R. 57.2 provides that the Court's opinion in any capital habeas corpus case "shall separately state each issue raised by the petition and will rule expressly on each issue stating the reasons for each ruling made." The Court will not be in a position to comply with Rule 57.2 until the newly-added claims are adjudicated and Magistrate Judge Merz has filed a report and recommendations on those claims.

Accordingly, the pending Report and Recommendations (Doc. No. 135), the pending Supplemental Report and Recommendations (Doc. No. 152), the Motion for Certificate of Appealability (Doc. No. 149), Petitioner's Supplemental Objections (Doc. No. 158); Magistrate Judge Merz's Report and Recommendations on Issues Raised by Recent Supreme Court Decisions (Doc. No. 188); Petitioner's Objections to that Report and Recommendations (Doc. No. 192), and Magistrate Judge Merz's Supplemental Report and Recommendations on Issues Raised by Recent Supreme Court Decisions (Doc. No. 195) are all found to be MOOT without prejudice to consideration of the issues raised therein when the case becomes ripe for final decision.

_______________

Timothy S. Black

United States District Court Judge


Summaries of

Turner v. Hudson

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION AT COLUMBUS
Mar 22, 2013
Case No. 2:07-cv-595 (S.D. Ohio Mar. 22, 2013)
Case details for

Turner v. Hudson

Case Details

Full title:MICHAEL R. TURNER, Petitioner, v. STUART HUDSON, Warden, Respondent.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION AT COLUMBUS

Date published: Mar 22, 2013

Citations

Case No. 2:07-cv-595 (S.D. Ohio Mar. 22, 2013)