Cayson v. State of Ohio, No. 1:2009cv01238 - Document 6 (N.D. Ohio 2009)
Court Description: Memorandum Opinion and Order that the request to proceed in forma pauperis is granted, and this action 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. Fed.R.App.P. 22(b); 28 U.S.C. § 2253. Judge Ann Aldrich on 8-3-09. (K,V)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Cayson v. State of Ohio Doc. 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EUGENE CAYSON, Petitioner, v. STATE OF OHIO, Respondent. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CASE NO. 1:09 CV 1238 JUDGE ANN ALDRICH MEMORANDUM OF OPINION AND ORDER On May 29, 2009, petitioner pro se Eugene Cayson filed the above-captioned petition for writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Cayson is incarcerated at the Southern Ohio Correctional Facility, having pleaded guilty to felonious assault with a firearm specification. For the reasons stated below, the petition is denied and this action is dismissed. A federal court may entertain a habeas petition filed by a person in state custody only on the ground that he is in custody in violation of the Constitution, laws, or treaties of the United States. 28 U.S.C. § 2254(a). In addition, petitioner must have exhausted all available state remedies. 28 U.S.C. § 2254(b). Cayson raises two grounds in support of the petition. Without regard to the potential merits of these grounds, it is evident on the face of the petition that they have yet to be raised Dockets.Justia.com and exhausted in the Ohio courts. The petition is thus premature. Accordingly, the request to proceed in forma pauperis is granted, and this action 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. Fed.R.App.P. 22(b); 28 U.S.C. § 2253. IT IS SO ORDERED. s/Ann Aldrich ANN ALDRICH UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Dated: August 3, 2009 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.
