Thompson v. Shelton

Filing 56

Memorandum Opinion: I adopt the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation. Petitioner Stoney Thompson's motion to stay proceedings and hold in abeyance is granted, on the condition that Petitioner complies with the terms listed by Magistrate Judge Greenburg in the R & R. re 54 Judge Jeffrey J. Helmick on 11/28/2017. (S,AL)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION Stoney Thompson, Case No. 13-cv-529 Petitioner v. MEMORANDUM OPINION Ed Shelton, Respondent Before me is the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Jonathan D. Greenberg, filed on September 5, 2017, regarding Petitioner Stoney Thompson’s motion to stay proceedings and hold the petition in abeyance. (Doc. No. 54). Pursuant to the agreement by both parties that stay and abeyance is warranted in this case, Magistrate Judge Greenberg recommends I grant Petitioner’s motion “on the condition that Thompson (1) initiate state court proceedings within ninety (90) days of this Order; (2) file quarterly status reports in this Court regarding the progress of state court proceedings; and (3) seek reinstatement on this Court’s active docket within thirty (30) days of fully exhausting his state court remedies.” Id. at 4. Magistrate Judge Greenberg also recommends “Respondent be allowed sixty (60) days from the date the stay is lifted to supplement the Return of Writ.” Id. I have also reviewed the status report filed October 4, 2017. (Doc. No. 55). Following review of the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation, and hearing no objections by either party, I adopt the Magistrate Judge’s proposal. The current proceedings regarding Thompson’s § 2254 habeas petition are stayed and the petition held in abeyance so long as Thompson complies with the conditions recommended by Magistrate Judge Greenberg, as set forth above. So Ordered. s/ Jeffrey J. Helmick United States District Judge 2

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?