Finnell v. Warden, Lebanon Correctional Institution

Filing 177

DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING 175 MOTION TO EXTEND TIME, New date requested 11/27/2023; denying re 175 MOTION for Reconsideration re 174 Order filed as to Kyle Finnell. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz on 11/21/23. (pb)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
WESTERN DIVISION AT CINCINNATI
KYLE FINNELL,
Petitioner,

:

- vs -

Case No. 1:17-cv-268
District Judge Douglas R. Cole
Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz

TIM SCHWEITZER, Warden,
Lebanon Correctional Institution,
:
Respondent.

DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO EXTEND TIME

This case is before the Court on Petitioner’s Petition to Extend Time from November 22,
2023, until November 27, 2023, to file a memorandum stating whether Petitioner believes the stay
of these proceedings should be extended pending decision on his two pending state court actions
(ECF No. 175). That Motion is granted.
The same document seeks reconsideration of the Magistrate Judge’s refusal to take judicial
notice of the content of his pending App. R. 26(B) Application and his pending Petition for PostConviction Relief. The Magistrate Judge had refused because, contrary to Petitioner’s assertion,
these documents were not available to the public on the websites of Hamilton County Court of
Common Pleas or the Ohio First District Court of Appeals. Finnell asks for reconsideration
because he claims he has furnished the Court with time-stamped copies of those documents (ECF
No. 175, PageID 4252). He refers to Exhibit A, but that consists of a copy of an envelope from
the Clerk of Courts of Hamilton County, a copy of the cover page only of what is apparently a
forty-eight page petition for post conviction relief, and a third page which says the document is
1

too large to print and refers the read to “our website.” Whatever those words on that page say, the
document as filed on June 8, 2023, cannot be accessed from that website by this Court. Therefore
the content of the Petition for post-conviction relief is not amenable to judicial notice. Finnell
gives no record reference at all to where his App. R. 26(B) application appears in the record.
Accordingly, the Motion for Reconsideration is DENIED.

November 21, 2023.
s/ Michael R. Merz
United States Magistrate Judge

2