Brown v. Warden, Warren Correctional Institution

Filing 76

DECISION AND ORDER - This case is before the Court on Petitioner's Objections 57 to the Magistrate Judge's Supplemental Memorandum on Motion for Evidentiary Hearing 48 . These Objections are dealt with in the Court's Corrected Deci sion and Order and are hereby expressly overruled. This ruling renders moot Petitioner's Objections 58 to the Magistrate Judge's denial of extension of time to file objections to the Supplemental Memorandum Opinion on Evidentiary Hearing . On May 15, 2018, Petitioner filed his Writ of District Judge to Review the Entire Record 60 . Despite his later objection to the Courts construing his writs as motions, in this Writ he moves for District Judge review of the entire record. As the Magistrate Judge has recommended 62 , Petitioner's Objections 67 are without merit and are overruled. Petitioner's Objections 63 to the Magistrate Judge's Order to Amend the Caption 56 are moot because the Magistrate Judge amend ed the caption back to the caption Petitioner used when he filed the case (with the exception of correcting an error in the spelling of Respondent's name). Signed by Judge Thomas M. Rose on 6-18-2018. (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
JEFFREY ANTONIO BROWN,
Petitioner,

:

- vs -

Case No. 3:17-cv-080
District Judge Thomas M. Rose
Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz

CHAE HARRIS, Warden,
Warren Correctional Institution,
:
Respondent.

DECISION AND ORDER

This case is before the Court on Petitioner’s Objections (ECF No. 57) to the Magistrate
Judge’s Supplemental Memorandum on Motion for Evidentiary Hearing (ECF No. 48) These
Objections are dealt with in the Court’s Corrected Decision and Order and are hereby expressly
overruled. This ruling renders moot Petitioner’s Objections (ECF No. 58) to the Magistrate
Judge’s denial of extension of time to file objections to the Supplemental Memorandum Opinion
on Evidentiary Hearing.
On May 15, 2018, Petitioner filed his “Writ of District Judge to Review the Entire Record”
(ECF No. 60). Despite his later objection to the Court’s construing his “writs” as motions, in this
“Writ” he moves for District Judge review of the entire record. Id. at PageID 3988. As the
Magistrate Judge has recommended (ECF No. 62), Petitioner’s Objections (ECF No. 67) are
without merit and are overruled.
Petitioner’s Objections (ECF No. 63) to the Magistrate Judge’s Order to Amend the
1

Caption (ECF No. 56) are moot because the Magistrate Judge amended the caption back to the
caption Petitioner used when he filed the case (with the exception of correcting an error in the
spelling of Respondent’s name).
IT IS SO ORDERED.

June 18, 2018

*/Thomas M. Rose
_____________________________
Thomas M. Rose
United States District Judge

2