Justice v. DeMartino

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
WESTERN DIVISION AT DAYTON
WILLIAM JUSTICE, II,
Petitioner, 	Case No. 3:24-cv-298
v.
WARDEN, Chillicothe Correctional 	District Judge Michael J. Newman
Institution, 	Magistrate Judge Kimberly A. Jolson
Respondent.
______________________________________________________________________________
ORDER: (1) ADOPTING THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED
STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE (Doc. No. 61); (2) GRANTING PETITIONER’S
MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE A LIMITED REPLY (Doc. No. 64) AND ACCEPTING
AS FILED PETITIONER’S LIMITED REPLY; (3) OVERRULING PETITIONER’S
OBJECTIONS (Doc. No. 62); (4) DENYING AND DISMISSING WITH PREJUDICE
THE PETITION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS (Doc. No. 8); (5) DENYING
PETITIONER’S EMERGENCY MOTION TO GRANT INTERIM RELEASE (Doc. No.
27) AND HIS EMERGENCY MOTION FOR EXPEDITED RULING AND IMMEDIATE
RELEASE (Doc. No. 47); (6) AFFIRMING THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S ORDER
GRANTING PETITIONER’S MOTIONS TO SUPPLEMENT THE RECORD (Doc. Nos.
43, 45, 48); (7) AFFIRMING THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S ORDER DENYING
PETITIONER’S MOTIONS (Docs. Nos. 23, 29, 38, 49, 50, 51, 52, 54, 55); (8) AFFIRMING
THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S ORDER OVERRULING RESPONDENT’S MOTION TO
STRIKE (Doc. No. 23); (9) AFFIRMING THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S ORDER
OVERRULING AS MOOT PETITIONER’S OBJECTION TO RESPONDENT’S
MOTION TO STRIKE (Doc. No. 29); (10) DENYING A CERTIFICATE OF
APPEALABILITY; (11) CERTIFYING THAT ANY APPEAL WOULD BE
OBJECTIVELY FRIVOLOUS AND FINDING THAT IN FORMA PAUPERIS STATUS
SHOULD BE DENIED ON APPEAL; AND (12) TERMINATING THIS CASE
ON THE DOCKET
______________________________________________________________________________
Petitioner, an inmate in state custody, brings this case pro se seeking a writ of habeas corpus
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254.1 Doc. No. 8. This case is before the Court upon the Report and
Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Kimberly A. Jolson (Doc. No. 61), to whom this
1 The Court liberally construes Petitioner’s pro se filings in his favor. See Estelle v. Gamble, 429 U.S. 97,
106 (1976); see also Mayes v. Warden, Chillicothe Corr. Inst., No. 3:22-cv-313, 2024 WL 3163957, at *1
(S.D. Ohio June 25, 2024).
Case: 3:24-cv-00298-MJN-KAJ Doc #: 65 Filed: 03/05/26 Page: 1 of 3 PAGEID #: <pageID>

case was referred pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b). Judge Jolson recommends that this Court dismiss
the petition with prejudice. Doc. No. 61 at PageID 3137. Petitioner timely filed objections to the
Report and Recommendation (Doc. No. 62) and a motion to file a limited reply (Doc. No. 64), which
the Court GRANTS. Petitioner’s limited reply (Doc. No. 64 at PageID 3175-87) is ACCEPTED
AS FILED.
As required by 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b), the Court has reviewed the
comprehensive findings of the Magistrate Judge and considered de novo all filings in this matter,
including Petitioner’s objections and limited reply; the motions addressed and ruled on by the
Magistrate Judge (Doc. Nos. 23, 29, 37, 38, 43, 45, 49, 48, 50, 51, 52, 54, 55); and Respondent’s
contentions (Doc. No. 63). Upon careful de novo consideration of the foregoing, the Court agrees
with Respondent’s contentions and concludes that Petitioner’s objections and his arguments raised in
his limited reply lack merit. The Court further concludes that the Report and Recommendation sets
forth the applicable law, is well reasoned, and should be adopted.
Accordingly, the Court (1) ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate
Judge; (2) GRANTS Petitioner’s motion to file a limited reply and ACCEPTS AS FILED
Petitioner’s limited reply (Doc. No. 64-1 at PageID 3175-87); (3) OVERRULES Petitioner’s
objections; (4) DENIES AND DISMISSES WITH PREJUDICE the petition for a writ of habeas
corpus; (5) DENIES Petitioner’s emergency motion to grant interim release and his emergency
motion for expedited ruling and immediate release; (6) AFFIRMS the Magistrate Judge’s Order
granting Petitioner’s motions to supplement the record; (7) AFFIRMS the Magistrate Judge’s denial
of Petitioner’s additional motions; (8) AFFIRMS the Magistrate Judge’s Order OVERRULING
Respondent’s motion to strike; (9) AFFIRMS the Magistrate Judge’s Order OVERRULING AS
MOOT Petitioner’s objection to Respondent’s motion to strike; (10) DENIES a certificate of
appealability; and (11) CERTIFIES that any appeal would be objectively frivolous and FINDS that
in forma pauperis status should be DENIED on appeal. This case is TERMINATED on the docket.
Case: 3:24-cv-00298-MJN-KAJ Doc #: 65 Filed: 03/05/26 Page: 2 of 3 PAGEID #: <pageID>

IT IS SO ORDERED.
March 5, 2026 	s/Michael J. Newman
Hon. Michael J. Newman
United States District Judge
Case: 3:24-cv-00298-MJN-KAJ Doc #: 65 Filed: 03/05/26 Page: 3 of 3 PAGEID #: <pageID>