Blevins v. Warden, Ross Correctional Institution

Filing 61

ORDER DISSOLVING STAY - On March 16, 2011, the Ohio Supreme Court declined jurisdiction over Petitioner's appeal to that court from denial by the First District Court of Appeals of his pro se motion to amend his state post-conviction petition (E ntry, Case No. 2010-2263). Accordingly, Petitioner appears to have exhausted his available state court remedies and the stay of these proceedings pending exhaustion (Doc. No. 56) is DISSOLVED. Respondent shall file an amended answer containing any ad ditional material from the state court record necessary for this Court's decision not later than May 1, 2011. Petitioner shall file his amended reply and any request for discovery and/or an evidentiary hearing not later than June 1, 2011. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael R Merz on 4/14/2011. (kpf1)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION AT DAYTON CHARLES BLEVINS, : Petitioner, Case No. 1:05-cv-038 : -vs- Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz WARDEN, Ross Correctional Institution, : Respondent. ORDER DISSOLVING STAY On March 16, 2011, the Ohio Supreme Court declined jurisdiction over Petitioner’s appeal to that court from denial by the First District Court of Appeals of his pro se motion to amend his state post-conviction petition (Entry, Case No. 2010-2263). Accordingly, Petitioner appears to have exhausted his available state court remedies and the stay of these proceedings pending exhaustion (Doc. No. 56) is DISSOLVED. Respondent shall file an amended answer containing any additional material from the state court record necessary for this Court’s decision not later than May 1, 2011. Petitioner shall file his amended reply and any request for discovery and/or an evidentiary hearing not later than June 1, 2011. April 14, 2011. s/ Michael R. Merz United States Magistrate Judge -1-

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?