JOHNSON

v.

UNITED STATES

S.D. Fla. | 2019-10-29

No. 19-cv-62046

District Court, S.D. Florida (2019)

AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.

Holding

The court affirmed and adopted the Magistrate Judge's Report, dismissing the motion without prejudice as premature.

Facts & Procedural History

Movant filed a Writ of Habeas Corpus which was referred to a Magistrate Judge. The Magistrate Judge recommended dismissal as premature, and no objecti…

The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Topics

Federal Statute Of Limitations Report And Recommendation Clear Error Review Dismissal Without Prejudice

Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Federal Statute Of Limitations cases and more on FLexlaw

Opinion of the Court

THIS CAUSE comes before the Court on Magistrate Judge Lisette Reid’s Report of Magistrate Judge (“Report”) [ECF No. 6].

On June 24, 2019, Movant Maurice Alfonso Johnson filed a Writ of Habeas Corpus (the “Motion”) [ECF No. 1].1 The case was referred to Judge Reid for a Report and Recommendation pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B). [ECF No. 2]. Judge Reid’s Report recommended that the Motion be dismissed as premature, no certificate of appealability be issued, and the case be closed. [ECF No. 6]. No timely objections were filed. A district court may accept, reject, or modify a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).

Those portions of the report and recommendation to which objection is made are accorded de novo review, if those objections “pinpoint the specific findings that the party disagrees with.” United States v. Schultz, 565 F. 3d 1353, 1360 (11th Cir. 2009); see

Accordingly, itis ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows: (1) Judge Reid’s Report and Recommendation [ECF No. 6] is AFFIRMED AND ADOPTED and incorporated into this Order by reference; (2) Movant’s Motion [ECF No. 1] is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE, except as to application of the federal statute of limitations or other procedural defenses which may apply; (3) No certificate of appealability shall be issued; (4) This action shall be CLOSED. DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Miami, Florida, this 29th day of October, 2019.

DARRIN P. GAYLES

UNITED STATES DI. ICT JUDGE

Footnotes

1 Judge Reid construed the Motion as Movant’s attempt to file a pro se Motion to Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct Sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255. Because the Motion seeks “discharge” from Movant’s criminal conviction, the Court agrees with Judge Reid’s construction. [ECF No. 1, at 4]. also Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3). Any portions of the report and recommendation to which no specific objection is made are reviewed only for clear error. Liberty Am. Ins. Grp., Inc. v. WestPoint Underwriters, L.L.C., 199 F. Supp. 2d 1271, 1276 (M.D. Fla. 2001); accord Macort v. Prem, Inc., 208 F. App’x 781, 784 (11th Cir. 2006). The Court, having reviewed the record for clear error, agrees with Judge Reid’s wellreasoned analysis and findings that Movant’s claims are premature.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Authorities Cited

United States v. Schultz, 565 F.3d 1353 (11th Cir. 2009)
Liberty Am. Ins. Grp., Inc. v. Westpoint Underwriters, L.L.C., 2001 WL 1850837 (M.D. Fla. 2001)

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw