From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Portis v. Williams

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI EASTERN DIVISION
Mar 22, 2021
CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:20-cv-40-TBM-JCG (S.D. Miss. Mar. 22, 2021)

Opinion

CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:20-cv-40-TBM-JCG

03-22-2021

RICKY PORTIS PETITIONER v. WARDEN JESSIE WILLIAMS RESPONDENT


ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION AND GRANTING RESPONDENT'S MOTION TO DISMISS

This matter is before the Court on submission of the Report and Recommendation [14] entered by United States Magistrate Judge John C. Gargiulo on December 7, 2020. The Respondent filed a Motion to Dismiss [8] alleging that the Petition [1] for Writ of Habeas Corpus is barred by the one-year statute of limitations in 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d). The Petitioner filed his Response [11] to Respondent's Motion to Dismiss arguing that he is entitled to equitable tolling and, therefore, the one-year statute of limitations did not begin to run until January 20, 2020.

After considering the submissions of the parties, the record, and relevant legal authority, Judge Gargiulo concluded that the Petition [1] is barred by the one-year statute of limitations set forth in 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d). Judge Gargiulo recommends that Respondent's Motion to Dismiss [8] be granted and that the Petition [1] for Writ of Habeas Corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 be denied. The Petitioner has not filed an objection to the Report and Recommendation, and the time for filing an objection has expired.

"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." Casas v. Aduddell, 404 F. App'x 879, 881 (5th Cir. 2010); Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 152, 106 S. Ct. 466, 88 L. Ed. 2d 435 (1985) ("There is no indication that Congress, in enacting § 636(b)(1)(C), intended to require a district judge to review a magistrate's report to which no objections are filed."). Having considered Judge Gargiulo's 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 [14] entered by United States Magistrate Judge John C. Gargiulo on December 7, 2020 is ADOPTED as the opinion of the Court.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the Respondent's Motion to Dismiss [8] is GRANTED and that the Petition [1] for Writ of Habeas Corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.

THIS, the 22nd day of March, 2021.

/s/_________

TAYLOR B. McNEEL

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE


Summaries of

Portis v. Williams

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI EASTERN DIVISION
Mar 22, 2021
CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:20-cv-40-TBM-JCG (S.D. Miss. Mar. 22, 2021)
Case details for

Portis v. Williams

Case Details

Full title:RICKY PORTIS PETITIONER v. WARDEN JESSIE WILLIAMS RESPONDENT

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI EASTERN DIVISION

Date published: Mar 22, 2021

Citations

CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:20-cv-40-TBM-JCG (S.D. Miss. Mar. 22, 2021)