From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Taylor v. Brunsman

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION
Aug 20, 2014
CASE NO.: 3:12CV800 (N.D. Ohio Aug. 20, 2014)

Opinion

CASE NO.: 3:12CV800

08-20-2014

RAYMOND E. TAYLOR, JR., Petitioner, v. TIMOTHY BRUNSMAN, Respondent.


ORDER AND DECISION

The Court has examined the Report and Recommended Decision of Magistrate Judge Baughman, submitted in this matter on June 27, 2014. Doc. 21. Upon due consideration, and no objections having been filed by the parties, the Court adopts the Report and recommended findings and conclusions of the Magistrate Judge and incorporates them herein. Therefore, it is ordered that petition is hereby DISMISSED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART.

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C § 1915(a)(3), the Court certifies that Petitioner may not take an appeal from the Court's decision in good faith, and that there is no basis upon which to issue a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c); Fed. R. App. P. 22(b).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

August 20, 2014

/s/ John R. Adams

JUDGE JOHN R. ADAMS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE


Summaries of

Taylor v. Brunsman

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION
Aug 20, 2014
CASE NO.: 3:12CV800 (N.D. Ohio Aug. 20, 2014)
Case details for

Taylor v. Brunsman

Case Details

Full title:RAYMOND E. TAYLOR, JR., Petitioner, v. TIMOTHY BRUNSMAN, Respondent.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION

Date published: Aug 20, 2014

Citations

CASE NO.: 3:12CV800 (N.D. Ohio Aug. 20, 2014)

Citing Cases

Hively v. Warden, Marion Corr. Inst.

Therefore, the district court properly entertained Nash's sufficiency of the evidence claim because it has…

Bryant v. Turner

Id. at 765. See also Taylor v. Brunsman, No. 3:12CV800, 2014 WL 4113320, at *14 (N.D. Ohio Aug. 20,…