Rainey v. Director TDCJ-CID

Filing 7

MEMORANDUM ADOPTING 5 Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge and Order of Consolidation. It is ordered that this case is CONSOLIDATED for all purposed with 6:12cv324 and 6:12cv326, with 6:12cv324 designated as lead case. The 6 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis is denied as moot. The filing fee has been paid in 6:12cv324, and no other filing fees are required. No further entires are to be made in this case. Signed by Judge Michael H. Schneider on 6/21/2012. (leh, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
TYLER DIVISION
TIMOTHY RAINEY

§

v.

§

DIRECTOR, TDCJ-CID

§

CIVIL ACTION NO. 6:12cv324

and
TIMOTHY RAINEY

§

v.

§

DIRECTOR, TDCJ-CID

§

CIVIL ACTION NO. 6:12cv325

and
TIMOTHY RAINEY

§

v.

§

DIRECTOR, TDCJ-CID

§

CIVIL ACTION NO. 6:12cv326

MEMORANDUM ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
AND ORDER OF CONSOLIDATION
The Petitioner Timothy Rainey, proceeding pro se, filed these three habeas corpus
applications under 28 U.S.C. §2254 complaining of the legality of his confinement. This Court
ordered that the cases be referred to the United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
§636(b)(1) and (3) and the Amended Order for the Adoption of Local Rules for the Assignment of
Duties to United States Magistrate Judges.
Rainey appears to be challenging one or more convictions from the 7th Judicial District Court
in Smith County, Texas, for which he is serving a 30-year sentence. On May 23, 2012, the
Magistrate Judge issued a Report recommending that the cases be consolidated into one case and
1

heard together. See Rule 42(a), Fed. R. Civ. P.; Rule 2(e), Rules Governing Section 2254 Petitions
in the United States District Courts.
Rainey did not file objections to this Report; accordingly, he is barred from de novo review
by the district judge of those findings, conclusions, and recommendations and, except upon grounds
of plain error, from appellate review of the unobjected-to proposed factual findings and legal
conclusions accepted and adopted by the district court. Douglass v. United Services Automobile
Association, 79 F.3d 1415, 1430 (5th Cir. 1996) (en banc).
The Court has reviewed the pleadings in this cause and the Report of the Magistrate Judge.
Upon such review, the Court has concluded that the Report of the Magistrate Judge is correct. It is
accordingly
ORDERED that the Report of the Magistrate Judge (docket no. 5) is ADOPTED as the
opinion of the District Court. It is further
ORDERED that the above-styled civil actions be and hereby are CONSOLIDATED for all
purposes into one application for the writ of habeas corpus, styled as Rainey v. Director, TDCJ-CID,
civil action no. 6:12cv324. See Rule 42(a), Fed. R. Civ. P. Any pleadings or documents received
in any of these consolidated cases shall be docketed in cause no. 6:12cv324. It is further
ORDERED that the applications for leave to proceed in forma pauperis which were received
in cause no.’s 6:12cv325 (docket no. 6) and cause no. 6:12cv326 (docket no. 6) are DENIED as
moot, by reason of the payment of the filing fee in cause no. 6:12cv324. No other filing fees shall
be required by the district court in this case. Finally, it is

2

.

ORDERED that after this order, no further entries shall be made on the dockets of cause no.’s
6:12cv325 and 6:12cv326. This order of consolidation shall not affect the substantive rights of any
party to this case.
It is SO ORDERED.
SIGNED this 21st day of June, 2012.

____________________________________
MICHAEL H. SCHNEIDER
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

3