Skip to content.
About GPO   |   Newsroom/Media   |   Congressional Relations   |   Inspector General   |   Careers   |   Contact   |   askGPO   |   Help  
 

  FDsys > More Information
(Search string is required)
 

13-998 - Kinstle v. Cook


Download Files

Metadata

Document in Context
13-998 - Kinstle v. Cook
March 30, 2015
PDF | More
Report and Recommendation that Nicholas J. Kinstle be afforded a reasonable period of time to file an amended petition deleting his unexhausted grounds, Grounds Three through Fourteen. If Kinstle does not file an amended petition deleting Grounds Three through Fourteen, his entire Petition should be dismissed without prejudice. Objections to R&R due by 4/13/2015. Magistrate Judge Kathleen B. Burke on 3/30/2015. (D,I)
October 29, 2015
PDF | More
Memorandum Opinion: The Court adopts the interim R&R (Doc. No. 62), and accepts the recommendations contained therein. Petitioner is granted leave until November 20, 2015 to file an amended petition containing only exhausted Grounds 1, 2, 12, and 14. If petitioner does not file an amended complaint eliminating unexhausted Grounds 3-11 and 13 by November 20, 2015, the Court will dismiss the petition without prejudice. The Court certifies that an appeal from this decision could not be taken in good faith and that there is no basis upon which to issue a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. Section 2253(c); Fed. R. App. P. 22(b). Judge Sara Lioi on 10/29/2015. (P,J)
April 22, 2016
PDF | More
Report and Recommendation that Nicholas J. Kinstle's Amended Petition (Doc. 75) be DISMISSED because all his grounds asserted therein are procedurally defaulted. Objections to R&R due by 5/6/2016. Magistrate Judge Kathleen B. Burke on 4/22/2016. (D,I)
July 11, 2016
PDF | More
2016. (S,He)Memorandum Opinion: Before the Court is the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Kathleen B. Burke recommending denial of this pro se petition for writ of habeas corpus. (Doc. No. 85.) Petitioner Nicholas Kinstle has filed objections. (Doc. No. 87.) To the extent that Doc. Nos. 87 and 87-1 can be construed as raising "objections," they are overruled. The Court accepts the well-reasoned Report & Recommendation, the amended petition for writ of habeas corpus (Doc. No. 75) is denied, and the case is dismissed. Further, the Court certifies that an appeal from this decision could not be taken in good faith and that there is no basis upon which to issue a certificate of appealability. Judge Sara Lioi on 7/11/
October 25, 2016
PDF | More
Memorandum Opinion: Petitioner's motions seeking leave to file (Doc. Nos. 92, 93, 96), to the extent they seek relief from this Court, are denied. Judge Sara Lioi on 10/25/2016. (P,J)
January 17, 2017
PDF | More
ssued to address the certificate of appealability.) (Related Doc # 98). Judge Sara Lioi on 1/17/2017. (P,J)Memorandum Opinion (Nunc Pro Tunc): Petitioner's motions seeking leave to file (Doc. Nos. 92, 93, 96), to the extent they seek relief from this Court, are denied. Further, the Court certifies, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 1915(a)(3), that an appeal from this decision could not be taken in good faith, and that there is no basis upon which to issue a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. Section 2253(c); Fed. R. App. P. 22(b). (This nunc pro tunc memorandum opinion is being i