Barnes v. Huffman

• Court: District Court, S.D. Mississippi
• Decided: August 28, 2025
• Docket: 1:24-cv-00183
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI SOUTHERN DIVISION

EDWARD BARNES, III PETITIONER

v. CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:24-cv-183-TBM-RPM

BRAND HUFFMAN RESPONDENT

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

This matter is before the Court on the submission of the Report and Recommendation [8] entered by United States Magistrate Judge Robert P. Myers on May 27, 2025. Judge Myers recommends that Brand Huffman’s Motion to Dismiss [7] be granted and that Edward Barnes, III’s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus [1] be dismissed with prejudice as time barred. A copy of the Report and Recommendation [8] was mailed to Barnes at the address listed on the docket on May 27, 2025. On June 10, 2025, Barnes filed a Motion for Extension of Time [9] requesting an additional fourteen days to file an objection, which the Court granted. Barnes was mailed a copy of the text only Order and the notice of electronic filing advising him that he had until June 24, 2025, to file an objection. Despite requesting an extension of time, Barnes has not filed an objection to the Report and Recommendation and the time for filing an objection has expired. “When no timely objection is filed, the court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation.” FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b) advisory committee’s note to 1983 addition (citations omitted); see Casas v. Aduddell, 404 F. App’x 879, 881 (5th Cir. 2010) (“When a party fails timely to file written objections to the magistrate judge’s proposed findings, conclusions, and recommendation, that party is barred from attacking on appeal the unobjected-to proposed findings and conclusions which the district court accepted, except for plain error”) (citing Douglass v. United Serv. Auto Ass’n, 79 F.3d 1415, 1428-29 (5th Cir. 1996) (en banc); 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)). Having considered Judge Myers’ Report and Recommendation, the Court finds that it is neither clearly erroneous nor contrary to law.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the Report and Recommendation [8] entered by United States Magistrate Judge Robert P. Myers on May 27, 2025, is ADOPTED as the opinion of the Court. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Respondent Brand Huffman’s Motion to Dismiss [7] is GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Edward Barnes, III’s Petition for

Writ of Habeas Corpus [1] is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. THIS, the 28th day of August, 2025. _____________________________ TAYLOR B. McNEEL UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE