Smith v. Warden Franklin Medical Center
Filing
37
ORDER - To protect the Warden's right to be heard on this Motion without prejudicing Petitioner's opportunity to plead, Petitioner's obligation to file an amendment or supplement to his methodof-execution claims is hereby SUSPENDED until a date to be set by the Court in ruling on the pending Motion. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael R Merz on 9/29/2014. (kpf1)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
WESTERN DIVISION AT CINCINNATI
KENNETH SMITH,
:
Petitioner,
Case No. 1:12-cv-196
:
District Judge Thomas M. Rose
Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz
-vsWARDEN, FRANKLIN MEDICAL
CENTER
:
Respondent.
ORDER
This capital habeas corpus case is before the Court on Petitioner’s Third Motion to
Extend the Stay of Consideration of his Lethal-Injection Claims and to Extend the Time to File
his Motion for Leave to Amend his habeas Petition with Amended Lethal-Injunction Claims
(Doc. No. 36). Smith seeks extension of both dates to April 13, 2015. Consistent with S. D.
Ohio Civ. R. 7.3, Smith sought consent of opposing counsel which was declined. Id. at PageID
1058, 1068.
Smith’s current extension expires October 2, 2014. See Notation Order of June 7, 2014,
granting Doc. No. 35 Unopposed Motion for Extension of Time Until October 2, 2014. Under S.
D. Ohio Civ. R. 7.2, the Warden’s time for opposing the Renewed Motion to Modify does not
expire until October 16, 2014. Assuming the Warden files on the due date, Petitioner’s reply
will not be due until November 3, 2014.
1
To protect the Warden’s right to be heard on this Motion without prejudicing Petitioner’s
opportunity to plead, Petitioner’s obligation to file an amendment or supplement to his methodof-execution claims is hereby SUSPENDED until a date to be set by the Court in ruling on the
pending Motion.
September 29, 2014.
s/ Michael R. Merz
United States Magistrate 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?