Robinson v. Upton

Filing 5

ORDER overruling petitioner's objections and adopting 3 Report and Recommendation. Signed by Judge Ron Clark on 4/10/13. (tkd, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
BEAUMONT DIVISION
CORNELIUS ROBINSON

§

VS.

§

JODY R. UPTON

§

CIVIL ACTION NO.

1:13-CV-82

ORDER OVERRULING PETITIONER’S OBJECTIONS AND ADOPTING
THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Petitioner Cornelius Robinson, a federal prisoner confined in Beaumont, Texas, proceeding
through counsel, filed this petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241.
The Court ordered that this matter be referred 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 dismissing the petition.
The Court has received and considered the Report and Recommendation of United States
Magistrate Judge, along with the record and the pleadings. Petitioner filed objections to the
Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation.
The Court has conducted 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 the
objections are without merit. Citing United States v. Cotton, 535 U.S. 625, 630 (2002), petitioner
contends that he may challenge subject matter jurisdiction at any time. The Supreme Court held in
Cotton that a defective indictment does not deprive a court of jurisdiction. Cotton, 535 U.S. at 631.
The Supreme Court did not hold that a challenge to the court’s subject matter jurisdiction can be
raised for the first time in a § 2241 petition.

Petitioner may not challenge his conviction or sentence under § 2241, because his claims do
not meet the requirements set forth in Reyes-Requena v. United States, 243 F.3d 893, 904 (5th Cir.
2001); see also Wesson v. U.S. Penitentiary, 305 F.3d 343, 347 (5th Cir. 2002) (“This court must
apply the Reyes-Requena actual innocence test as the binding precedent in this circuit. . . .”).
ORDER
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
recommendation.
So ORDERED and SIGNED this 10 day of April, 2013.

___________________________________
Ron Clark, United States District Judge

2