🧪 TEST MODE ACTIVE Use test card: 4242 4242 4242 4242

Michael R. Merz

U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio magistrate 23 signed orders read

How Judge Merz decides

Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.

What persuades

Rigorous AEDPA gatekeeping: a time-barred petition is not rescued by the actual-innocence gateway unless the petitioner produces NEW reliable evidence (Schlup/Souter/McQuiggin) -- re-arguing trial insufficiency is not enough.

“Schlup, Souter, and McQuiggin plainly require new evidence and Carter has presented none.”

Applies Cullen v. Pinholster strictly: a federal habeas court cannot consider evidence the petitioner failed to put in the State Court Record; and there is no freestanding constitutional right to a new trial based on belatedly-claimed new evidence (Herrera).

“Because they are not part of the State Court Record, this Court cannot consider them. Cullen v. Pinholster, 563 U.S. 170 (2011).”

Procedural preferences

Recommends denying a certificate of appealability and certifying any appeal as objectively frivolous (no IFP) when reasonable jurists would not disagree -- a routine close to his dismissal R&Rs.

“it is also recommended that Petitioner be denied a certificate of appealability and that the Court certify to the Sixth Circuit that any appeal would be objectively frivolous”

Once a successive-petition transfer is docketed in the court of appeals, he treats the district court as divested of jurisdiction and denies further relief without prejudice to renewal if jurisdiction returns.

“Therefore Petitioner’s Motion to Stay is DENIED for lack of jurisdiction, without prejudice to its renewal if jurisdiction is returned to this Court.”

Cautions

Late-tendered evidence / new grounds raised after the case is ripe are denied as untimely or futile; he expects amendments via Rule 15 before the merits are submitted.

“Petitioner's companion Motion to Present Evidence (ECF No. 20) is DENIED because it is untimely -- the case is ripe for decision by Judge Hopkins.”

Signed rulings

A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.

Carter v. Warden, Noble Correctional Institution
· 2025-09-10
Habeas petition (petitioner) Denied

“Respondent's statute of limitations defense is well taken and the Petition should be dismissed with prejudice as untimely. ... the Magistrate Judge respectfully recommends the Petition be dismissed with prejudice.”

Jackson v. Martin, Warden, Noble Correctional Institution
· 2026-06-04
Habeas petition (petitioner) Denied

“Based on the foregoing analysis, the Magistrate Judge respectfully recommends the Petition be dismissed with prejudice. Because reasonable jurists would not disagree with this conclusion, it is also recommended that Petitioner be denied a certificate of appealability”

Ludwick v. Shoop, Warden, Chillicothe Correctional Institution
· 2025-12-10
Habeas petition (petitioner) Denied

“The Court also is issuing a Decision and Order on the Merits adopting the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendations recommending that the Habeas Petition be dismissed with prejudice. ... The Court is overruling Petitioner's Objections as to both of these matters.”

Elliott v. Warden, Southern Ohio Correctional Facility
· 2025-03-18
Motion for status (petitioner) Granted

“This habeas corpus case is before the Court on Petitioner's Motion to Request Case Status Update (ECF No. 21). That Motion is GRANTED.”

Motion to supplement record (petitioner) Denied

“Petitioner's companion Motion to Present Evidence (ECF No. 20) is DENIED because it is untimely -- the case is ripe for decision by Judge Hopkins. The additional evidence tendered does not show the case was timely filed.”

Struckman v. Warden, Pickaway Correctional Institution
· 2026-06-26
Summary judgment (petitioner) Denied

“Based on the foregoing analysis, the Magistrate Judge respectfully recommends Petitioner’s Motion for Summary Judgment be denied.”

Shine-Johnson v. Warden, Belmont Correctional Institution
· 2020-09-04
Motion for reconsideration (petitioner) Denied

“Accordingly, Petitioner’s motions for reconsideration and to have Chief Judge Marbley decide his discovery motion are DENIED. The denial of discovery of Attorney Benton’s file is without prejudice to its renewal at the appropriate time.”

Folley v. Foley, Warden
· 2022-04-04
Summary judgment (petitioner) Denied

“The Court DENIES, without prejudice to refiling, the ‘Motion for Summary Judgment in Pursuant to Snow Violation – Double Jeopardy Violation’ (Doc. No. 49)”

Summary judgment (petitioner) Denied

“The Court DENIES, without prejudice to refiling, the ‘Motion for Summary Judgment In Pursuant to Speedy Trial Violation’ (Doc. No. 51).”

Dieterle v. Warden, Marion Correctional Institution
· 2023-10-02
Habeas petition (petitioner) Denied

“Based on the foregoing analysis, the Magistrate Judge respectfully recommends that the Petition be dismissed as time-barred. Because reasonable jurists would not disagree with this conclusion, it is also recommended that Petitioner be denied a certificate of appealability”

Hughes v. Shoop, Warden, Chillicothe Correctional Institution
· 2023-10-30
Habeas petition (petitioner) Denied

“Accordingly, the Magistrate Judge’s R&Rs (ECF Nos. 4, 7) are hereby ADOPTED, Petitioner’s Objections (ECF Nos. 5, 8, 9) are OVERRULED, and Petitioner’s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (ECF No. 3) is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.”

White v. Warden, Pickaway Correctional Institution
· 2023-12-27
Habeas petition (petitioner) Denied

“Based on the foregoing analysis, the Magistrate Judge respectfully recommends the Petition herein be dismissed with prejudice.”

Dixon v. Warden, Chillicothe Correctional Institution
· 2023-01-19
Habeas petition (petitioner) Denied

“Merits review of Dixon’s Petition is barred by the statute of limitations and his procedural defaults in presenting his claims to the Ohio courts. The Petition should therefore be dismissed with prejudice.”

United States v. Sanders (Deon Sanders, Motion to Vacate under 28 U.S.C. § 2255)
· 2024-06-06
Motion to vacate 2255 (defendant) Denied

“Based on the foregoing analysis, the Magistrate Judge respectfully recommends that the Motion to Vacate be dismissed with prejudice. Because reasonable jurists would not disagree with this conclusion, it is also recommended that Defendant be denied a certificate of appealability”

Caseload & timing

From public federal docket records for this judge.

Judge Merz's sampled work is overwhelmingly composed of state-prisoner habeas petitions and federal motions to vacate referred by district judges across the Columbus, Dayton, and Cincinnati divisions. Directly assigned cases are comparatively sparse, so the sample is not a fixed caseload census.

Put Judge Merz's record to work

Ezel drafts and answers grounded in this exact profile: how Judge Merz actually rules, not a generic AI guess.

Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer is grounded in Judge Merz's own signed orders and cites them.