IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS EL DORADO DIVISION

ROBERT EARL ROBINSON PETITIONER

v. Case No. 1:24-cv-1084

STATE OF ARKANSAS RESPONDENT

ORDER

Before the Court is a Report and Recommendation issued by the Honorable Barry A. Bryant, United States Magistrate Judge for the Western District of Arkansas. ECF No. 11. Judge Bryant recommends that Respondent’s Motion to Dismiss Successive Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (ECF No. 10) be granted and that Petitioner’s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (ECF No. 1) be dismissed.1 Judge Bryant explains that the Court previously dismissed an identical 0F petition from Petitioner with prejudice2 and that Petitioner failed to obtain the required 1F certification from the Eighth Circuit to bring the successive petition for writ of habeas corpus. Judge Bryant notes that without such a certificate, this Court lacks jurisdiction over this matter. See, e.g., Boykin v. United States,

(8th Cir. 2000). Judge Bryant further recommends that the Court certify pursuant to

(a) that any appeal from such a dismissal would not be taken in good faith. Petitioner filed a timely objection. ECF No. 13. However, Petitioner’s objection does not address the substance of the R&R. Instead, Petitioner simply reiterates the allegations and arguments underlying his petition. Without a specific objection, the Court is only required to review Judge Bryant’s R&R for clear error. See Griffini v. Mitchell,

(8th Cir.

1 Judge Bryant notes that though Petitioner labeled the State of Arkansas as the respondent for his petition, the proper respondent for such petitions is Dexter Payne, the Director of the Arkansas Division of Correction. 2 Robinson v. Payne, 1:23-cv-1096-SOH, ECF No. 21. 1994) (noting that a specific objection is necessary to require a de novo review of a magistrate’s recommendation instead of a review for clear error). Upon review, finding no clear error on the face of the record and that Judge Bryant’s reasoning is sound, the Court adopts the R&R (ECF No. 11) in toto. Petitioner’s Petition for Writ

of Habeas Corpus (ECF No. 1) is hereby DISMISSED. The Court certifies pursuant to

(a) that any appeal from such a dismissal would not be taken in good faith. IT IS SO ORDERED, this 14th day of February, 2025.

/s/ Susan O. Hickey Susan O. Hickey Chief United States District Judge