Bohannon v. Warden, Allen/Oakwood Correctional Institution
Filing
25
Order - It is hereby ORDERED that the Clerk UNSEAL this case, but maintain under seal Doc. Nos. 1, 10, 11, 12, 20, and 23. To ensure public accountability of the Court, the pending Report and Recommendations is being re-filed in redacted form to remove the full names of the victims. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael R Merz on 10/15/2013. (kpf1)
<![CDATA[
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
WESTERN DIVISION AT CINCINNATI
JAMES BOHANNON,
Petitioner,
:
- vs -
Case No. 1:12-cv-542
Chief Judge Susan J. Dlott
Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz
WARDEN, Allen/Oakwood
Correctional Institution,
:
Respondent.
ORDER
This habeas corpus case is before the Court sua sponte for reconsideration of its sealed
status.
On November 28, 2012, Respondent moved under S. D. Ohio Civ. R. 79.3 to “seal the
record” in this case, including the transcript of trial and the Answer/Return of Writ (Motion,
Doc. No. 10, PageID 50). As grounds therefor, Respondent noted that the case involved a
number of incidents of male-on-male rape or gross sexual imposition and sought that the record
be sealed “in light of the obviously sensitive nature of the record involving male victims who
unwillingly become [sic] the objects of Bohannon’s forced sexual interest.” Id. at PageID 51. It
was represented that the Hamilton County Common Pleas Court “has retained the record under
seal.” Id.
Reciting the circumstances relied on by Respondent, Magistrate Judge Litkovitz ordered
that the Answer/Return of Writ and the state court record be retained under seal (Order, Doc. No.
11). Judge Litkovitz’s Order was entered December 3, 2012. On December 4, 2012, a deputy
1
clerk annotated the docket to note
Case has been unsealed per direction of MJ Litkovitz chambers.
Counsel only requesting answer/return of writ and state court
proceedings to be maintained under seal. Motion to Seal was filed
inadvertently by counsel as to the entire case. Per chambers, the
motion and order will be maintained under seal. (tt) Modified on
12/4/2012 - TO REFLECT CASE AGAIN SEALED DUE TO
VICTIM NAMED IN PETITION (tt).
Upon reconsideration, the Magistrate Judge cannot justify continued sealing of the entire
case. Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that the Clerk UNSEAL this case, but maintain under
seal Doc. Nos. 1, 10, 11, 12, 20, and 23. To ensure public accountability of the Court, the
pending Report and Recommendations is being re-filed in redacted form to remove the full
names of the victims.
October 15, 2013.
s/ Michael R. Merz
United States Magistrate Judge
2
]]>
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?
