Case Information
*1 Case 3:19-cv-00630-DPJ-FKB Document 10 Filed 04/08/20 Page 1 of 2 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI NORTHERN DIVISION
TERRENCE BURNS PETITIONER VS. CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:19cv630-DPJ-FKB VICTOR MASON RESPONDENT
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Terrence Burns filed this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 2241 while he was a pretrial detainee in the Hinds County Detention Center asking for dismissal of pending charges and release. Presently before the Court is the motion [8] of Respondent to dismiss the petition as moot. Burns has not responded to the motion. The undersigned recommends that the motion be granted.
At the time of the filing of the petition, Burns was awaiting trial on three separate indictments: A 2015 indictment for possession with intent to distribute, a 2017 indictment for domestic violence with a deadly weapon, and a 2017 indictment for drug trafficking. Burns alleged in his petition that he was being denied due process in his pending criminal proceedings, that he was being illegally detained without bond, and that he was being denied his right to a speedy trial. He sought release from detention and dismissal of all charges. In his motion to dismiss the petition, Respondent has submitted court documents indicating that on November 5, 2019, Burns pleaded guilty to lesser charges in the two drug cases. [8-7] The court sentenced him on those charges, and it remanded the domestic violence case to the file. [8-8].
Burns’s requests that the charges be dismissed and that he be released from pretrial detention are clearly moot, as those charges are no longer pending, and he is
Case 3:19-cv-00630-DPJ-FKB Document 10 Filed 04/08/20 Page 2 of 2 no longer being held in pretrial detention in connection with them. For these reasons, the undersigned recommends that Respondent’s motion be granted and that this matter be dismissed.
The parties are hereby notified that failure to file written objections to the proposed findings, conclusions, and recommendation contained within this report and recommendation within fourteen (14) days after being served with a copy shall bar that party, except upon grounds of plain error, from attacking on appeal the proposed factual findings and legal conclusions accepted by the district court. 28 U.S.C. § 636; Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b); Douglass v. United Services Automobile Ass’n , 79 F.3d 1415, 1428-29 (5th Cir. 1996).
Respectfully submitted, this the 8 th day of April, 2020.
s/ F. Keith Ball____________________ United States Magistrate Judge 2