Murphy v. Martin
MEMORANDUM ORDER overruling petitioner's objections and adopting the magistrate judge's 2 Report and Recommendation. Signed by Judge Thad Heartfield on 12/18/2012. (bjc)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:12cv31
MEMORANDUM ORDER OVERRULING PETITIONER’S OBJECTIONS AND
ADOPTING THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Petitioner Isaiah Murphy, an inmate confined at the Federal Correctional Complex in
Beaumont, Texas, proceeding pro se, brought this petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 2241.
The court referred this matter to the Honorable Zack Hawthorn, United States Magistrate
Judge, at Beaumont, Texas, for consideration pursuant to applicable laws and orders of this court.
The Magistrate Judge recommends the petition be dismissed.
The court has received and considered the Report and Recommendation of United States
Magistrate Judge filed pursuant to such order, along with the record and pleadings. Petitioner filed
objections to the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation. This requires a de novo review
of the objections in relation to the pleadings and the applicable law. See FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b).
After careful consideration, the court concludes petitioner’s objections should be overruled.
Petitioner’s petition does not meet the criteria required to support a claim under the savings clause
of 28 U.S.C. § 2255. See Padilla v. United States, 416 F.3d 424 (5th Cir. 2005); Reyes-Requena v.
United States, 243 F.3d. 893 (5th Cir. 2001). To the extent petitioner requested to have his claims
transferred to the Lufkin Division for consideration as a motion to vacate, set aside or correct
sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255, his claims collaterally attacking his conviction and sentence
have been severed and filed as a new civil action. The resulting case has been transferred for
consideration in the Lufkin Division of this court.
Accordingly, petitioner’s objections are OVERRULED.
The findings of fact and
conclusions of law of the Magistrate Judge are correct and the report of the Magistrate Judge is
ADOPTED. A final judgment will be entered in this case in accordance with the Magistrate Judge’s
SIGNED this the 18 day of December, 2012.
United States District Judge
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?