Lewis v. Arkansas, State of et al

1
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
FAYETEVILLE DIVISION
DESTIN ALLEN LEWIS 	PLAINTIFF
v. 	CIVIL NO. 5:25-cv-05117
STATE OF ARKANSAS and
BENTON COUNTY 	DEFENDANTS
REPORT AND RECOMMENATION OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Destin Allen Lewis (Lewis) filed this action on May 27, 2025, naming as Defendants the
State of Arkansas and Benton County, Arkansas and seeking declaratory relief pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 2201, The Declaratory Judgment Act. (ECF No. 3). Because Lewis seeks declaration that
his conviction in Benton County Circuit Court Case No. 04CR-16-545 is void ab initio “due to the
absence of a signed plea agreement or adjudication of guilt, and that any continuing enforcement
of registry or supervision conditions arising from that judgment violates the Constitution,” the
undersigned views Lewis’ claim for relief as one for habeas relief pursuant to 28 U.S.C.§ 2254.
(ECF No. 12). 	Upon initial review, the undersigned recommended that Lewis’ request for
emergency relief be denied, and he was provided the necessary paperwork and directed to file his
§ 2254 habeas petition by June 20, 2025. (ECF No. 12).
Lewis’ subsequent objections to the Report and Recommendation were overruled by Chief
U.S. District Judge Timothy L. Brooks (ECF No. 16), and Lewis’ Emergency Petition for Writ of
Mandamus was denied by the Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit. (ECF Nos. 17-18). Lewis
then filed a Notice of Appeal; the Eighth Circuit remanded the matter for a determination of a
certificate of appealability; and Judge Brooks denied Lewis’ request for a Certificate of
Appealability. (ECF Nos. 23-28).
Case 5:25-cv-05117-TLB Document 50 Filed 02/02/26 Page 1 of 3 PageID #:
<pageID>

2
On October 2, 2025, the undersigned recommended that Lewis’ suit be dismissed for
failure to file his habeas petition by the deadline of June 20, 2025, and for his failure to respond to
a show cause order. (ECF No. 38). Lewis did not object, the Report and Recommendation was
adopted by Judge Brooks, and Lewis’ case was dismissed on October 22, 2025. (ECF No. 39).
On November 13, 2025, Lewis filed a Motion to Reopen Case (ECF No. 41) which was
granted by Judge Brooks, who noted Lewis’s argument that he “did not understand that he was
required to file a proper petition for habeas corpus relief by the deadline specified by the Court.”
(ECF No. 42). Judge Brooks directed the Court Clerk to send Lewis another § 2254 form petition
and ordered Lewis to file his habeas petition by December 8, 2025. Id.
Mail sent to Lewis was returned to the Clerk, and therefore, on December 11, 2025, the
undersigned ordered the Warden at Lewis’ facility to provide Lewis with a 3rd § 2254 form petition
and Judge Brooks’ November 2025 Order. 	The undersigned extended Lewis’ habeas filing
deadline to January 24, 2026, because of the returned mail. (ECF No. 47).
On the next day – December 12, 2025 – Lewis filed objections to Judge Brooks’ Order of
November 13, saying once again that he is seeking relief under the Declaratory Judgment Act, and
not habeas relief pursuant to § 2254. 	Lewis says he cannot proceed under § 2254 because that
assumes custody pursuant to a valid state court judgment, and as he continues to argue, Lewis
points to the alleged absence of a valid judgment he can challenge. (ECF No. 48).
Lewis’ extended January 24, 2026, deadline to file a habeas petition has now come and
gone without a habeas filing.
Despite Lewis’ contentions, there exists a 2 nd Amended Sentencing Order in Lewis’ Benton
County criminal case – 04CR-16-545 – entered on June 30, 2017, made pursuant to Lewis’ guilty
“plea directly to the court,” and sentencing Lewis to 72 months in the Arkansas Department of
Case 5:25-cv-05117-TLB Document 50 Filed 02/02/26 Page 2 of 3 PageID #:
<pageID>

3
Corrections on breaking and entering with a 72-month consecutive term of imprisonment on theft
of property. https://caseinfo.arcourts.gov/opad/case/04CR-16-545 (February 2, 2026). Any claim
by a prisoner attacking the validity or duration of his confinement must be brought under the
habeas sections of Title 28 of the United States Code. Preiser v. Rodriguez, 411 U.S. 475, 500
(1973). The Declaratory Judgment Act affords Lewis no avenue of relief from this criminal
judgment. See Campbell v. Evnen, 2025 WL 1167838 (D. Neb. April 22, 2025) (collecting and
citing cases that Declaratory Judgment Act cannot be used in lieu of habeas). 	Because Lewis
intentionally declines to comply with the Court’s § 2254 filing requirement, and because his
current pleadings provide no cognizable basis for challenging his state court judgment, the
undersigned recommends that this matter be DISMISSED.
The parties have fourteen days from receipt of the Report and Recommendation in
which to file written objections pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). The failure to file timely
objections may result in waiver of the right to appeal questions of fact. 	The parties are
reminded that objections must be both timely and specific to trigger de novo review by the
District Court.
IT IS SO ORDERED this 2nd day of February 2026.
.
CHRISTY COMSTOCK
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Case 5:25-cv-05117-TLB Document 50 Filed 02/02/26 Page 3 of 3 PageID #:
<pageID>