Opinion

Brown v. Payne

Court
District Court, E.D. Arkansas
Filed
May 27, 2025
Cited by
0 cases
Authority
More cited than 35.8%

The opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS

CENTRAL DIVISION

GARY LEWIS BROWN,

ADC #115152 PETITIONER

v. Case No. 4:22-cv-00524-KGB

DEXTER PAYNE RESPONDENT

ORDER

Before the Court is the Recommended Disposition submitted by United States Magistrate

Judge Edie Ervin (Dkt. No. 19). Petitioner Gary Lewis Brown has filed objections to Judge Ervin’s

Recommended Disposition (Dkt. Nos. 20; 21). Mr. Brown also filed additional documents with

the Court (Dkt. Nos. 22; 23). After careful review of the Recommended Disposition and Mr.

Brown’s objections, and a de novo review of the record including all of his filings, the Court adopts

the Recommended Disposition as its findings of fact and conclusions of law (Dkt. No. 19).

The Court writes to address the objections. Mr. Brown is currently serving a 35-year

sentence in the Arkansas Division of Correction (Dkt. No. 1, at 3). Mr. Brown’s petition asserts

that the Arkansas Supreme Court erred in denying his petition to reinvest jurisdiction in the trial

court for consideration of coram nobis relief due to an alleged violation under Brady v. Maryland,

373 U.S. 83 (1963), because the video presented at trial was allegedly different from the one

produced in discovery in that it was altered to make inaudible “derogatory comments by law

enforcement.” (Dkt. No. 1, at 4-5). As best the Court can determine, Mr. Brown’s objections raise

issues regarding his constitutionally guaranteed right to counsel, as well as due process and equal

protection claims (Dkt. No. 20, at 1). The only claim raised by Mr. Brown in his objections that

is also raised in his petition is the equal protection claim (Dkt. Nos. 1, at 4–5; 20, at 1). The

Recommended Disposition concludes that Mr. Brown’s equal protection claim is procedurally

defaulted (Dkt. No. 19, at 4-7). Based on this Court’s review, the objections do not address the

procedural default issue (Dkt. No. 20, at 1). After careful review of the Recommended Disposition,

Mr. Brown’s objections, and a de novo review of the record, the Court finds that Mr. Brown’s

objections break no new ground and fail to rebut the Recommended Disposition. The Court adopts

the Recommended Disposition.

It is so ordered this 27th day of May, 2025.

Kush A: Palin

Kristine G. Baker

Chief United States District Judge

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.