Brown v. Hughes

• Court: District Court, W.D. Kentucky
• Decided: September 17, 2025
• Docket: 3:24-cv-00062
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY AT LOUISVILLE CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:24-CV-000062-CRS-HBB

KENNETH W. BROWN PETITIONER

v.

CRAIG HUGHES, WARDEN RESPONDENT

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Petitioner, Kenneth W. Brown, instituted this action by filing a motion to vacate, set aside or correct his sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (DN 1). The Court referred this matter to Magistrate Judge H. Brent Brennenstuhl (DN 6). Thereafter, Respondent, Craig Hughes, responded to Brown’s Petition (DN 13) to which Brown filed a reply (DN 14). On March 24, 2025, Magistrate Judge Brennenstuhl issued his Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Recommendation (DN 15) (the “Report”). In his Report, the magistrate judge advised the parties that objections to the Report must be filed within fourteen (14) days. Report, DN 15 at PageID# 287. The magistrate judge also advised that a party’s failure to timely object would constitute a waiver of the right to further appeal. Id. (citing Thomas v. Arn, 728 F.2d 813 (6th Cir. 1984)). Although Brown was allotted an additional three (3) days because he was served by mail, Brown did not file Objections until April 21, 2025 – 28 days later – well past his deadline. The calculation of Brown’s deadline for Objections is governed by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 6. Under FED. R. CIV. P. 6(a)(1), every day is counted, except for the day of the event and except for the last day of the time period if the last day falls on a Saturday, Sunday, or a legal holiday. Additionally, under FED. R. CIV. P. 6(d), three days must be added to the fourteen-day period because Brown was served with the magistrate judge’s Report by mail. As a result, Brown had seventeen (17) days from date of the magistrate judge’s Report and the date on which it was mailed in which to file his Objections, making his deadline Thursday, April 10, 2025. Under the “mailbox rule,” Brown’s Objections are deemed filed on the date he placed them in the prison mailbox. Thompson v. Chandler, 36 F. App’x 783, 784 (6th Cir. 2002) (citing Towns v. U.S., 190 F.3d 468, 469 (6th Cir. 1999)). Brown put his Objections in the prison mailbox on April 21, 2025. Brown Declaration, DN 16, at PageID# 29 (“Today, 4-21-25, . .. Iam depositing the Petitioner’s Objections to Magistrate’s Report and Recommendations in this case in the institutional mail system.”) (emphasis in original). His Objections were eleven days too late. By failing to timely object, Brown has waived his right to do so. Thomas, 782 F.2d at 814-15. Therefore, the Court will adopt the magistrate judge’s Report in its entirety. A separate order and judgment will be entered this date in accordance with this Memorandum Opinion.

September 16, 2025

Charles R. Simpson Il, Senior Judge United States District Court