Williams v. Miller, No. 1:2016cv00042 - Document 5 (N.D. Ohio 2016)
Court Description: Opinion and Order. Petitioner's Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (Related doc # 2 ) is granted. Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus is dismissed without prejudice pursuant to Rule 4 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases. The Court certifies, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), that an appeal from this decision could not be taken in good faith and that there is no basis on which to issue a certificate of appealability. Judge Christopher A. Boyko on 1/26/2016. (H,CM)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Williams v. Miller Doc. 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION MARC WILLIAMS, Petitioner, v. MICHELLE MILLER, Respondent. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CASE NO. 1: 16 CV 42 JUDGE CHRISTOPHER A. BOYKO OPINION AND ORDER CHRISTOPHER A. BOYKO, J.: Pro se Petitioner Marc Willims has filed this Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, challenging his 2012 convictions, pursuant to a guilty plea, of Rape and Kidnapping with Sexual Motivation in the Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas. A federal court may entertain a habeas petition filed by a person in state custody only on the ground he is custody in violation of the Constitution, laws, or treaties of the United States. 28 U.S.C. § 2254(a). An Application for a Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be granted unless it appears that the Petitioner “has exhausted all remedies available in the courts of the State.” 28 U.S.C. § 2254(b). Dockets.Justia.com Petitioner raises one ground for relief in his petition: that he was denied his constitutional rights during sentencing on his plea. However, Petitioner indicates in his Petition that a post-conviction motion, and/or a habeas corpus petition, in which he raised this ground are still pending in Ohio courts. (See Petition at ¶¶11(d) and (e) regarding state post-conviction proceedings and other relief). Thus, this Petition is premature as the Petitioner has not fully exhausted his state court remedies. Conclusion Accordingly, the Petitioner’s Request to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (Doc. No. 2) is granted, but for the reasons stated above, his Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus is dismissed without prejudice pursuant to Rule 4 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases. Further, the Court certifies, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), that an appeal from this decision could not be taken in good faith and that there is no basis on which to issue a certificate of appealability. IT IS SO ORDERED. s/ Christopher A. Boyko CHRISTOPHER A. BOYKO UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE DATED: January 26, 2016 -2-
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
