United States District Court, N.D. Ohio, Western Division
Steven L. Stanley, Petitioner
Michelle Miller, Warden, Respondent
JEFFREY J. HELMICK UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
me are: (1) Magistrate Judge George J. Limbert's Report
and Recommendation (Doc. No. 30); (2) Respondent's
objections to the R & R (Doc. No. 31); (3)
Petitioner's pro se objections to the R & R
(Doc. No. 39); (4) Respondent's response to
Petitioner's pro se objections (Doc. No. 42);
(5) Petitioner's supplemental objections to the R &
R, filed with the assistance of appointed counsel (Doc. No.
55); and (6) Respondent's response to the supplemental
objections. (Doc. No. 56).
the time the R & R has been pending, Stanley has also
filed the following four motions: (1) motion to amend the
petition (Doc. No. 37), to which Respondent responded (Doc.
No. 40); (2) motion for protective petition for stay and
abeyance (Doc. No. 38), opposed by Respondent (Doc. No. 41);
(3) motion for consideration for grant of protective petition
(Doc. No. 43), with opposition by Respondent (Doc. No. 44)
and reply by Petitioner (Doc. No. 45); and (4) motion to take
judicial notice (Doc. No. 47), with opposition by Respondent
(Doc. No. 48) and reply by Petitioner. (Doc. No. 49). I will
address these motions along with Petitioner's and
Respondent's objections to the R & R, in turn.
reviewing the state court record, I find Magistrate Judge
Limbert accurately and comprehensively set forth the factual
background and procedural history of this case, and I adopt
those sections of the R & R, in full. (Doc. No. 30 at
in 1996, Stanley pled guilty to two counts of kidnapping, two
counts of illegal possession of firearms in liquor permit
premises, and one count of having weapons while under
disability. (Doc. No. 22-1 at 3-6). He was sentenced to an
indeterminate term of seven to fifteen years of
incarceration. Id. After serving 128 months, Stanley
was released on parole in 2003. Id. at 7-12. But,
because he wanted to “max out” his sentence,
Stanley refused to sign the Certificate of Parole.
Id. Almost immediately after his release, he was
considered to be a parole violator-at-large when he failed to
report to the halfway house, violating one of the conditions
of parole. Id. at 18-21.
of reporting to the halfway house in Ohio, Stanley moved to
the state of Oregon to live with family. (Doc. No. 55 at 3).
For approximately nine years, Stanley lived in Oregon without
interference by the Ohio Parole Authority, who initially
claimed it had no knowledge of Stanley's whereabouts but
later determined that there had been communication with
Stanley in 2009. (Doc. No. 22-1 at 24-25, 40). The Ohio
Parole Authority did not serve Stanley with reporting
instructions to report to the Akron District Office until
July 2012, when he was arrested in Oregon. Id. But
upon his release from custody in Oregon, he failed to comply
with the reporting instructions and was again considered a
parole violator-at-large. Id. at 25-26. Stanley did
not return to Ohio until September 2014, after he was
arrested again in Oregon in May 2014. Id. at 40-43.
After a hearing in January 2015, his parole was revoked and
he was placed in the custody of Belmont Correctional
Institution. Id. at 40-50.
petitioned the state for a writ of habeas corpus claiming,
among other things, that the Ohio Parole Authority knew of
his location and unreasonably delayed executing the warrant
and extradition process. Id. at 78-106. He also
asserted that the parole revocation hearing itself was
unreasonably delayed and that his counsel at the revocation
hearing was ineffective. Id. But the trial court
granted the state's motion for summary judgment and
dismissed the case. Id. at 228. Stanley did not file
a notice of appeal.
24, 2015, Stanley filed the § 2254 habeas petition
currently before me. (Doc. No. 1).
petition, he asserted the following grounds for relief:
GROUND ONE: Due Process violation
Supporting Facts: Eleven year delay in Ohio issuing,
executing their warrant and in the extradition of petitioner
which he claims was an “unreasonable delay” and
violated his due process rights under Fourteenth Amendment.
GROUND TWO: Unreasonable Delay (Holding Revocation Hearing)
Supporting Facts: A parolee has certain constitutional rights
before a parole can be revoked and one such right is that a
“revocation hearing must be tendered within a
reasonable time after a parolee is taken into custody.”
Morrissey v. Brewer (1972), 408 U.S. 471, 488, 92
S.Ct. 2593, 2603-2604, 33 L.Ed. 484, 498; (other citations
GROUND THREE: (Ineffective Assistance of Counsel, Revocation)
Supporting Facts: “Mr. Griffon, the assigned/appointed
by defendant OAPA's institutional Public Defender, by
refusing to carry out his client's wishes and function as
an ‘active advocate', cannot foreclose review of
non-frivolous constitutional claims and failure to do so
“must constitute ‘cause and prejudice' for
any resulting default.” Jones, 103 S.Ct. ...