Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Perotti v. Erdos

United States District Court, S.D. Ohio, Western Division, Cincinnati

June 3, 2019

JOHN PEROTTI, Petitioner,
v.
RON ERDOS, Warden, Southern Ohio Correctional Facility, Respondent.

          Susan J. Dlott, District Judge

          REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS

          Michael R. Merz, Magistrate Judge

         In this habeas corpus action under 28 U.S.C. § 2241, Petitioner challenges the May 2016 revocation of his parole (Petition, ECF No. 1, PageID 4). He reports that he previously filed No. 1:00-cv-527 related to the same claim. Id. at PageID 6.

         Petitioner pleads the following grounds for relief:

Ground One: Respondents have retaliated against Perotti, both for previous actions, and for appealing the 5-11-16 continuance [spelling unclear] and have records of litigation in his master file.
Ground Two: Respondents violated Perotti's right to be free from erroneous information in making a decision.
Ground Three: Respondents delayed his revocation hearing, refused to call his witnesses and transcripts, delay resulted in inability to defend due to witness deaths.
Ground Four: Petitioner was denied his right to counsel of choice, access to a law library, before revocation hearing, subjected to a S.B.2 criteria, is being held past his statutory maximum sentences.

Id. at PageID 7.

         Perotti also lists in the attached Memorandum ten supposed causes of action related to his grounds for relief. They are

1. Respondents have retaliated against petitioner for exercising his constitutional rights in violation of the First Amendment to the United States and Ohio constitution as well as state statute.
2. Respondents have violated 5 U.S.C. §552 and the Ohio and United States of America [Constitutions] by not keeping accurate records on petitioner and relying upon the same to continue him 5 years based upon false information violating his procedural and substantive due process rights to a fair hearing based upon accurate facts.
3. Respondent Ohio [Adult Parole Authority (“APA”)] was notified of the availability of petitioner for a revocation hearing but failed to hold said hearing within a reasonable period of time causing irreparable harm and prejudice to him in violation of State statute [sic] and constitution.
4. Respondents refusal to hold the formal revocation hearing while petitioner was on bond and available to the APA caused petitione[r] irreparable harm and was conspiratorily [sic] and retalitorily [sic] motivated in violation of state and federal statutes and constitution.
5. Respondents refusal to allow petitioner access to the law library, phone, and counsel of choice before the revocation hearing deprived him of his right to a fair hearing, access to the courts as guarenteed by state and ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.