# Brown v. Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections

> District Court, S.D. Florida · May 11, 2021

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/10119112

## Case

- **Court:** District Court, S.D. Florida
- **Decided:** May 11, 2021
- **Opinion:** 100trialcourt
- **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/10119112

## Opinion text

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
FORT PIERCE DIVISION

CASE NO. 19-14210-CIV-CANNON/Reid

FRANKLIN BROWN,

Petitioner,

v.

SEC’Y, FLA. DEP’T OF CORR.,

Respondent.
______________________________/

ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

THIS CAUSE is before the Court upon the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant
to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 [ECF No. 1], filed by Petitioner Franklin Brown on June 17, 2019 (“Petition”).
The Court referred the Petition to Magistrate Judge Lisette M. Reid for a Report and
Recommendation (“Report”) on all dispositive matters [ECF No. 2]. On March 10, 2021,
Magistrate Judge Reid issued a Report recommending that the Petition be denied, the Motion to
Stay the Instant Proceeding [ECF No. 13] be denied, and that no certificate of appealability issue
[ECF No. 15]. The Report advised the Petitioner to file any objections within fourteen days of the
date of service of a copy of the Report [ECF No. 15, p. 17]. To date, Petitioner has not filed any
objections or sought additional time within which to do so.
A district court “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or part, the findings or
recommendations made by the magistrate judge.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). When a party makes
timely objections to a Report and Recommendation, the district court “make[s] a de novo
determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed findings or recommendations
to which objection is made.” Id. When no party objects, the district court need not conduct a de
CASE NO. 19-14210-CIV-CANNON

novo review. Garvey v. Vaughn, 993 F.2d 776, 779 n.9 (11th Cir. 1993); see also United States v.
Slay, 714 F.2d 1093, 1095 (11th Cir. 1983); Macort v. Prem, Inc., 208 F. App’x 781, 784 (11th
Cir. 2006).
The Court has carefully reviewed the Petition [ECF No. 1], the State’s Response [ECF No.
10; ECF No. 10-1], Petitioner’s Motion to Stay Proceedings [ECF No. 13], the State’s Response
in Opposition [ECF No. 14], and the Report [ECF No. 15]. Applying the clearly erroneous
standard, the Court ADOPTS the Report and ACCEPTS Judge Reid’s recommendation that the
Petition and Motion to Stay be DENIED for the reasons set forth therein.
Accordingly, it is ORDERED and ADJUDGED as follows:
1. The Report [ECF No. 15] is ADOPTED;
2. The Petition [ECF No. 1] is DENIED;
3. The Motion to Stay [ECF No. 13] is DENIED;
4. A Certificate of Appealability SHALL NOT ISSUE;
5. All pending motions are DENIED AS MOOT; and
6. The Clerk shall CLOSE this case.
DONE AND ORDERED in Fort Pierce, Florida this 10th day of May 2021.

AILEE i CANNON
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
ce: counsel of record
Franklin Brown, #419235
Okeechobee Correctional Institution
Inmate Mail/Parcels
3420 N.E. 168th Street
Okeechobee, Florida 34972
PROSE

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/10119112. Public record. Not legal advice.