Lynch v. Hudson

Filing 117

ORDER - It is ORDERED that the Court's prior Order that Petitioner file a motion under Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) raising his claims that Hall and Brumfield apply to this case be, and it hereby is AMENDED to set the date for filing to fourteen days after the District Judges ruling on Lynch's above-mentioned objection. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz on 8/29/2016. (kpf)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
EASTERN DIVISION AT COLUMBUS
RALPH LYNCH,
Petitioner,

:

- vs -

Case No. 2:07-cv-948
District Judge Michael R. Barrett
Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz

STEWART HUDSON, Warden,
:
Respondent.

ORDER

This capital habeas corpus case is before the Court on Petitioner’s Second Motion to
Hold Rule 60(b) Filing in Abeyance (ECF No. 115). Petitioner seeks to stay the filing of a 60(b)
motion because he objects “to the appropriateness of a Rule 60(b) motion for raising the
applicability of Hall v. Florida, 134 S.Ct. 1986 (2014) and Brumfield v. Cain, 135 S.Ct. 2269
(2015), to his claim of having intellectual disability.” (ECF No. 116, PageID 2015). Petitioner’s
First Motion for this relief was denied for failure to comply with S. D. Ohio Civ. R. 7.3, but now
Petitioner’s counsel have complied and Warden’s counsel has agreed.
It is accordingly ORDERED that the Court’s prior Order that Petitioner file a motion
under Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) raising his claims that Hall and Brumfield apply to this case be, and it
hereby is AMENDED to set the date for filing to fourteen days after the District Judge’s ruling
on Lynch’s above-mentioned objection.

1

IT IS SO ORDERED.

August 29, 2016.
s/ Michael R. Merz
United States Magistrate Judge

2