Jones v. Salmonson

Filing 5

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS. It is accordingly ORDERED that the Magistrate Judges report (Docket No. 2) is ADOPTED as the opinion of the District Court. It is further ORDERED that the above-styled petition for writ of habeas corpus is DISMISSED. Signed by District Judge Robert W. Schroeder, III on 10/26/20. (lfs, )

Case 5:20-cv-00124-RWS-CMC Document 5 Filed 10/26/20 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 21

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
TEXARKANA DIVISION
SHUNTRELL JONES,
Plaintiff,
v.
WARDEN SALMONSON,
Defendant.

§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§

CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:20-CV-00124-RWS

ORDER
Petitioner Shuntrell Jones, an inmate confined at the Federal Correctional Institution in
Texarkana, 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 Caroline Craven, United States
Magistrate Judge, at Texarkana, Texas, for consideration pursuant to applicable laws and orders
of this Court. The Magistrate judge recommends that the above-styled petition be dismissed
without prejudice. Docket No. 2.
The Court has received and considered the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate
Judge along with the record, pleadings, and all available evidence. Jones acknowledged receipt of
the Report and Recommendation on July 16, 2020. Docket No. 4. Neither party has objected to
the Report and Recommendation.
Because no objections to the report have been received, Jones is not entitled to de novo
review by the District Judge of the Magistrate Judge’s findings, conclusions and recommendations,
and except upon grounds of plain error, he is barred from appellate review of the unobjected-to
factual findings and legal conclusions accepted and adopted by the District Court. 28 U.S.C.

Case 5:20-cv-00124-RWS-CMC Document 5 Filed 10/26/20 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 22

§ 636(b)(1)(C); Douglass v. United Servs. Auto. Assoc., 79 F.3d 1415, 1430 (5th Cir. 1996) (en
banc).
Nonetheless, the Court has reviewed the pleadings in this cause and the report of the
Magistrate Judge and agrees with the report of the Magistrate Judge. 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)). It is accordingly
ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge’s report (Docket No. 2) is ADOPTED as the
opinion of the District Court. It is further
ORDERED that the above-styled petition for writ of habeas corpus is DISMISSED.
So ORDERED and SIGNED this 26th day of October, 2020.

____________________________________
ROBERT W. SCHROEDER III
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Page 2 of 2