Simpson v. Hobbs
ORDER adopting 6 Proposed Findings and Recommendations in their entirety except as to the finding that petitioner's claims are procedurally barred. Accordingly, judgment shall be entered dismissing this complaint with prejudice. The Court will not issue a certificate of appealability because Petitioner has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. Signed by Judge Susan Webber Wright on 9/25/2014. (ks)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
PINE BLUFF DIVISION
BARRY LYNN SIMPSON
ADC # 106378
RAY HOBBS, Director,
Arkansas Department of Correction
Case No. 5:13-CV-00256 SWW-JTK
The Court has received the Proposed Findings and Recommendations from United States
Magistrate Judge Jerome T. Kearney. After careful review of the findings and recommendations and
the timely objections thereto, as well as a de novo review of the record, the Court concludes that the
findings and recommendations should be, and are hereby, approved and adopted in their entirety
except as to the finding that petitioner’s claims are procedurally barred. The Court finds that the
procedural default argument, which petitioner makes in light of Martinez v. Ryan, 132 S.Ct. 1309
(2012) and Trevino v. Thaler, 133 S.Ct. 1911 (2013), need not be consider under the circumstances
in this case, where the limitations period has long since expired. See Henderson v. Hobbs, 2012 WL
4049222, Eastern District of Arkansas, August 29, 2012 (“The Martinez Court did not create,
however, a new ground for equitable tolling of the statute of limitations.”)
Accordingly, judgment shall be entered dismissing this complaint with prejudice.
The Court will not issue a certificate of appealability because Petitioner has not made a
substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)-(2).
IT IS SO ORDERED this 25th day of September, 2014.
/s/Susan Webber Wright
United States District Judge
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?