Leonard v. Warden, Ohio State Penitentiary

Filing 86

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS re 1 in 1:17-cv-00028-TSB-MRM, Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, re 6 in 1:09-cv-00056-SJD-MRM Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus. Objections to R&R due by 3/21/2017. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz on 3/7/17. (kma)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
WESTERN DIVISION AT CINCINNATI
PATRICK LEONARD,
:
Petitioner,

Case Nos. 1:09-cv-56 & 1:17-cv-28
:

District Judges Susan J. Dlott &
Timothy S. Black

-vs-

Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz

WARDEN, Ohio State Penitentiary,
:
Respondent.

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
These capital habeas corpus cases are before the Court on the Suggestion of Death of
Petitioner (ECF No. 84 in Case 1:09-cv-56 & ECF No. 14 in Case No. 1:17-cv-028). Because
Petitioner is no longer in custody as is necessary for this Court to exercise habeas corpus
jurisdiction, it is respectfully recommended that these cases be dismissed without prejudice as
moot.

March 7, 2017.
s/ Michael R. Merz
United States Magistrate Judge

1

NOTICE REGARDING OBJECTIONS
Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b), any party may serve and file specific, written objections to the
proposed findings and recommendations within fourteen days after being served with this Report
and Recommendations. Such objections shall specify the portions of the Report objected to and
shall be accompanied by a memorandum of law in support of the objections. If the Report and
Recommendations are based in whole or in part upon matters occurring of record at an oral
hearing, the objecting party shall promptly arrange for the transcription of the record, or such
portions of it as all parties may agree upon or the Magistrate Judge deems sufficient, unless the
assigned District Judge otherwise directs. A party may respond to another party=s objections
within fourteen days after being served with a copy thereof. Failure to make objections in
accordance with this procedure may forfeit rights on appeal. See United States v. Walters, 638
F.2d 947, 949-50 (6th Cir. 1981); Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 153-55 (1985).

2