Brewster v. Director, TDCJ-CID

Filing 18

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS for 16 Report and Recommendation. It is ORDERED that this petition for writ of habeas corpus is DISMISSED without prejudice pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4 (b). Signed by District Judge Robert W. Schroeder, III on 3/1/2021. (slo, )

Case 5:19-cv-00159-RWS-CMC Document 18 Filed 03/01/21 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 51

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
TEXARKANA DIVISION
SAMMY RAY BREWSTER,
Plaintiff,
v.
DIRECTOR, TDCJ-CID,
Defendant.

§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§

CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:19-CV-00159-RWS

ORDER
Petitioner Sammy Ray Brewster, formerly an inmate confined within the Texas
Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division, proceeding pro se, filed this
petition for writ of habeas corpus. The Court referred this matter to the United States Magistrate
Judge.
The Magistrate Judge submitted a Report and Recommendation recommending the petition
be dismissed without prejudice pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). Docket No. 16.
Petitioner acknowledged receipt of the Report and Recommendation on February 1, 2021. Docket
No. 17.
The parties had 14 days from receipt of the Report and Recommendation to file objections.
To date, no objections have been filed.
Because no objections to the Magistrate Judge’s Report have been filed, neither party is
entitled to de novo review by the District Judge of those findings, conclusions and
recommendations, and except upon grounds of plain error, they are barred from appellate review
of the unobjected-to factual findings and legal conclusions accepted and adopted by the District

Case 5:19-cv-00159-RWS-CMC Document 18 Filed 03/01/21 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 52

Court. 28 U.S.C § 636(b)(1)(C); Douglass v. United Services Automobile Assoc., 79 F.3d 1415,
1430 (5th Cir. 1996) (en banc).
Nonetheless, the Court has reviewed the motion and the Magistrate Judge’s report and
agrees with the report. See United States v. Raddatz, 447 U.S. 667, 683 (1980) (“[T]he statute
permits the district court to give to the magistrate’s proposed findings of fact and recommendations
‘such weight as [their] merit commands and the sound discretion of the judge warrants.’ ”) (quoting
Mathews v. Weber, 23 U.S. 261, 275 (1976)). As Petitioner failed to respond to a court order
directing him to provide additional information regarding his petition, he has failed to diligently
.
prosecute this case.
Accordingly, finding no plain error in the findings of fact and conclusions of law of the
Magistrate Judge, the Court ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation of United States
Magistrate Judge as the findings and conclusions of this Court. It is therefore
ORDERED that this petition for writ of habeas corpus is DISMISSED without prejudice
pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). An appropriate Final Judgment shall be entered
dismissing the petition.
SIGNED this 1st day of March, 2021.

____________________________________
ROBERT W. SCHROEDER III
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Page 2 of 2