Robert Boyd v. Warden, Madison Correctional Institution

Summary

The United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio denied Petitioner Robert Boyd’s motions for discovery and written depositions in his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas corpus case. The court concluded that Boyd had not shown circumstances permitting consideration of new evidence notwithstanding Cullen v. Pinholster, and noted that a Report and Recommendations had recommended dismissal of the petition with prejudice.

Holdings

1. The court denied the motions for discovery and written depositions because the petitioner failed to show that any recognized circumstance permitting consideration of new evidence outside the Pinholster rule existed in his case.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the petitioner was entitled to conduct discovery and take written depositions in his federal habeas proceeding despite the limitations imposed by Cullen v. Pinholster.

Disposition

other