Stewart v. Payne

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS CENTRAL DIVISION PHILLIP DEWAYNE STEWART PETITIONER a/k/a SHAQUILE LEBRON ISRAEL v. 4:22-cv-00253-LPR-JJV DEXTER PAYNE, Director, Arkansas Division of Correction RESPONDENT ORDER The Court has reviewed the Proposed Findings and Recommended Disposition (PFRD) submitted by United States Magistrate Judge Joe J. Volpe and Petitioner’s Objections.' After carefully considering the objections and making a de novo review of the PFRD and record, the Court concludes the PFRD should be, and hereby is, approved and adopted in its entirety as this Court’s findings in all respects.’ IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that: 1. Mr. Stewart’s § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. No. 1) is DISMISSED with prejudice. 2. A certificate of appealability will not issue. Dated this 27th day of December 2022.

LEE P. ee UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

' Here, the Court uses the phrase “Petitioner’s Objections” to refer to Docs. 16 and 17. Doc. 16 is what one would traditionally think of as an objection. Doc. 17 is styled a motion, but is actually a bunch of asserted facts Mr. Stewart wants the Court to consider. The Court has considered them. 2 The Court wishes to note the fairly-strong implication in Spencer v. Kemna, 523 U.S. 1, 7 (1998) that the Supreme Court’s presumption of collateral consequences recognized in Footnote 1 of the PFRD should be revisited in an appropriate case.