Whitlock v. Dir, TDCJ
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS for 2 Report and Recommendations. Signed by Judge David Folsom on 12/7/09. (mrm, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TEXARKANA DIVISION TARRANCE DARON WHITLOCK VS. DIRECTOR, TDCJ-CID § § § CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:09cv160
MEMORANDUM ORDER OVERRULING OBJECTIONS AND ADOPTING THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION Tarrance Daron Whitlock, proceeding pro se, filed the abovestyled petition for writ of habeas corpus. The court previously
referred this matter to the Honorable Earl S. Hines, United States Magistrate Judge, at Beaumont, Texas, for consideration pursuant to applicable laws and orders of this court. The
magistrate judge has submitted a Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge concerning this matter. magistrate judge recommends that the petition be denied. The court has received and considered the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge filed pursuant to such referral, along with the record, pleadings and all available evidence. 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. Petitioner filed objections to the Report The
CIV. P. 72(b).
After careful consideration, the court concludes
the objections are without merit. As petitioner is not eligible for release on mandatory supervision, he was not entitled to due process before receiving the punishment imposed as a result of his prison disciplinary conviction. 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. final judgment will be denying this petition. A
SIGNED this 7th day of December, 2009.
____________________________________ DAVID FOLSOM 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?