Jimmy Lee Holmes v. Dexter Payne, Director, Arkansas Division of Correction...

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS CENTRAL DIVISION

JIMMY LEE HOLMES PETITIONER No. 4:25-cv-01198 JM/PSH DEXTER PAYNE, Director, Arkansas Division of Correction (“ADC”) RESPONDENT

PROPOSED FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION INSTRUCTIONS The following Proposed Recommendation has been sent to United States District Judge James M. Moody, Jr. You may file written objections to all or part of this Recommendation. If you do so, those objections must: (1) specifically explain the factual and/or legal basis for your objection; and (2) be received by the Clerk of this Court within fourteen (14) days of this Recommendation. By not objecting, you may waive the right to appeal questions of fact.

DISPOSITION Jimmie Lee Holmes (“Holmes”) filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus on November 17, 2025. Doc. No. 1. The Court subsequently directed Holmes to file an amended petition and either pay the filing fee or file an application to proceed in forma pauperis. Doc. No. 3. Holmes was instructed to comply with the Court’s Order on or before January 14, 2026. Id. He was also notified of his responsibility to comply with the Local Rules, including Local Rule 5.5.(c)(2), and warned that failure to comply would result in the recommended dismissal of his case without prejudice.

Holmes has not responded to the Court’s December 12 Order. Under these circumstances, the Court concludes that Holmes’ petition should be dismissed without prejudice for failure to comply with Local Rule 5.5(c)(2). See Miller v. Benson, 51 F.3d 166, 168 (8th Cir. 1995) (district courts have inherent power to dismiss sua sponte a case for failure to prosecute, and exercise of that power is reviewed for abuse of discretion). This Local Rule requires Holmes to respond to communication from the Court within thirty days. Despite ample opportunity, Holmes has failed to comply with the requirements of the Court’s Order and the Local Rules.

Therefore, the Court recommends that Holmes’ petition for writ of habeas corpus be dismissed without prejudice for failure to comply with Local Rule 5.5(c)(2).

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253 and Rule 11 of the Rules Governing Section 2554 Cases in the United States District Court, the Court must determine whether to issue a certificate of appealability in the final order. In § 2254 cases, a certificate of appealability may issue only if the applicant has made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)-(2). The Court finds no issue on which petitioner has made a substantial showing of a denial of a constitutional right. Thus, the Court recommends the certificate of appealability be denied.

IT IS SO ORDERED this 4th day of February, 2026.

UNITED STATES TAGs) RATE JUDGE