Harris II v. State Of Ohio

Filing 11

ENTRY AND ORDER OVERRULING OBJECTIONS 10 , ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS 8 AND TERMINATING CASE. The Court dismissed this case for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, as reasonable jurists would not agree with this conclusion, the Court den ies a certificate of appealability to Petitioner and certifies to the Sixth Circuit that any appeal would be objectively frivolous and therefore Petitioner should not be permitted to proceed in forma pauperis. Signed by Judge Thomas M. Rose on 10-14-2015. (de)(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 DAYTON
RONALD E. HARRIS, II,
Case No. 3:15-cv-179
Petitioner,
v.

Judge Thomas M. Rose
Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz

WARDEN, Chillicothe Correctional
Institution,
Respondent.
______________________________________________________________________________
ENTRY AND ORDER OVERRULING OBJECTIONS (DOC. 10);
ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS (DOC. 8); AND
TERMINATING THIS CASE
______________________________________________________________________________
This habeas corpus case is before the Court on the Objections (Doc. 10) filed by Petitioner
Ronald E. Harris, II (“Petitioner”) to the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendations (Doc.
8). In the Report and Recommendations, the Magistrate Judge recommended that the Court
dismiss this case for lack of subject matter jurisdiction under Burton v. Stewart, 549 U.S. 147
(2007).
As required by 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b), the Court has
made a de novo review of the record in this case. Upon said review, the Court finds that
Petitioner’s Objections (Doc. 10) to the Report and Recommendations (Doc. 8) are not well taken
and they are hereby OVERRULED. The Court ADOPTS the Report and Recommendations
(Doc. 18) in their entirety and rules as follows:


The Court DISMISSES this case for lack of subject matter jurisdiction;



As reasonable jurists would not disagree with this conclusion, the Court
DENIES a certificate of appealability to Petitioner;



The Court CERTIFIES to the Sixth Circuit that any appeal would be

objectively frivolous and therefore Petitioner should not be permitted to proceed
in forma pauperis; and


The Clerk is ORDERED to terminate this case on the docket of this Court.

DONE and ORDERED in Dayton, Ohio, this Wednesday, October 14, 2015.

s/Thomas M. Rose
________________________________
THOMAS M. ROSE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2