Whitman v. Gray

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO ------------------------------------------------------- : RICHARD STANTON WHITMAN, : CASE NO. 5:19-CV-842 : Petitioner, : : vs. : ORDER : WARDEN BELMONT CORR. INST., : : Respondent. : : -------------------------------------------------------

JAMES S. GWIN, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE:

Pro se litigant Richard Stanton Whitman seeks an Order from the Court to protect his potential Habeas Petition from being dismissed as untimely when he files it. He initiated this action with a Motion for Stay and Abeyance. He, however, did not file a Habeas Petition, and there was nothing pending for this Court to stay. Whitman has now filed a Motion requesting this Court to determine in advance of his filing when the statutory deadline for filing a Petition will expire.1 Article III of the Constitution restricts the jurisdiction of federal courts to “cases” and “controversies.” This Court cannot rule on an issue that may be raised if Whitman were to file a case.”2 Accordingly, Whitman’s Motion for Ruling in Regards to Federal Statutory Filing Dates/Requirements3 is denied. IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: September 23, 2019 s/ James S. Gwin JAMES S. GWIN UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

1 Doc. No. 4. 2 Chafin v. Chafin, 568 U.S. 165, 171-72 (2013).