Jones v. State of Texas

Filing 11

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS. The Report of the Magistrate Judge 9 is ADOPTED as the opinion of the District Court. The above-styled application for the writ of habeas corpus is DISMISSED without prejudice for failure to prosecute. All motions which may be pending in this action are herebyDENIED. Signed by Judge Leonard Davis on 03/11/15. (mll, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
TYLER DIVISION
JAMES EDWIN JONES

§

v.

§

STATE OF TEXAS

§

CIVIL ACTION NO. 6:13cv936

MEMORANDUM ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
AND ENTERING FINAL JUDGMENT
The Plaintiff James Jones, proceeding pro se, filed this application for the writ of habeas
corpus under 28 U.S.C. §2254 challenging his detention in the Van Zandt County Jail. This Court
ordered that the case 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.
Jones was ordered to file an amended petition in conformity with Rule 2(c) of the Rules
Governing Section 2254 Cases in the United States District Courts. When he failed to do so, the
Magistrate Judge issued a Report recommending that the petition be dismissed for failure to
prosecute or to obey an order of the Court. A copy of this Report was sent to Jones at his last known
address, return receipt requested, but no objections have been received; 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 determined that the Report of the Magistrate Judge is correct. See
United States v. Wilson, 864 F.2d 1219, 1221 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 492 U.S. 918, 109 S.Ct. 3243
1

(1989) (where no objections to a Magistrate Judge’s Report are filed, the standard of review is
“clearly erroneous, abuse of discretion and contrary to law.”). It is accordingly
ORDERED that the Report of the Magistrate Judge (docket no. 9) is ADOPTED as the
opinion of the District Court. It is further
ORDERED that the above-styled application for the writ of habeas corpus is DISMISSED
without prejudice for failure to prosecute. Finally, it is
ORDERED that any and all motions which may be pending in this action are hereby
DENIED.
So ORDERED and SIGNED this 11th day of March, 2015.

__________________________________
LEONARD DAVIS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2