Smith v. Hobbs

PROPOSED FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

JEROME T. KEARNEY, Magistrate Judge.

Instructions

The following recommended disposition has been sent to United States District Court Judge D. P. Marshall Jr. Any party may serve and file written objections to this recommendation. Objections should be specific and should include the factual or legal basis for the objection. If the objection is to a factual finding, specifically identify that finding and the evidence that supports your objection. An original and one copy of your objections must be received in the office of the United States District Court Clerk no later than fourteen (14) days from the date of the findings and recommendations. The copy will be furnished to the opposing party. Failure to file timely objections may result in waiver of the right to appeal questions of fact.

If you are objecting to the recommendation and also desire to submit new, different, or additional evidence, and to have a hearing for this purpose before the District Judge, you must, at the same time that you file your written objections, include the following:

1. Why the record made before the Magistrate Judge is inadequate.

2. Why the evidence proffered at the hearing before the District Judge (if such a hearing is granted) was not offered at the hearing before the Magistrate Judge.

3. The detail of any testimony desired to be introduced at the hearing before the District Judge in the form of an offer of proof, and a copy, or the original, of any documentary or other non-testimonial evidence desired to be introduced at the hearing before the District Judge.

From this submission, the District Judge will determine the necessity for an additional evidentiary hearing, either before the Magistrate Judge or before the District Judge.

Mail your objections and "Statement of Necessity" to:

Disposition

BEFORE THE COURT is the Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus filed by Tyrone Roddell Smith. (Doc. No. 1). After reviewing the parties' briefing and the available evidence, the Court finds that Petitioner's claims should be DISMISSED.

Background

On June 15, 2005, Petitioner was convicted by a Pulaski County (Arkansas) jury of two counts of rape, committed against his eleven-year-old stepdaughter and her twelve-year-old friend during a sleepover at Petitioner's house. He was sentenced to concurrent terms of 35 years' imprisonment for each count. On appeal, Petitioner argued that the trial court erred when it overruled his objection to the prosecutor's improper comments during closing. His convictions were affirmed by the Arkansas Court of Appeals on October 4, ...