Dudley v. Director, TDCJ-CID

Filing 9

MEMORANDUM ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS. The report of the magistrate judge 7 is ADOPTED as the opinion of the District Court. The above styled application for the writ of habeas corpus is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Petitioner Antoni o Dudley is DENIED a certificate of appealability sua sponte. This denial refers only to the dismissal of the present petition and has no effect upon the Petitioner's right to complete the exhaustion process or his right to seek relief in federal court in the event that he does not obtain the relief which he seeks through the prison grievance procedure. Any and all motions which may be pending in this action are hereby DENIED. Signed by Judge Michael H. Schneider on 03/17/15. (mll, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
TYLER DIVISION
ANTONIO DUDLEY

§

v.

§

DIRECTOR, TDCJ-CID

§

CIVIL ACTION NO. 6:15cv84

MEMORANDUM ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
AND ENTERING FINAL JUDGMENT
The Petitioner Antonio Dudley, proceeding pro se, filed this application for the writ of habeas
corpus under 28 U.S.C. §2254 complaining of the legality of prison disciplinary action taken against
him during his confinement in the Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions
Division. This Court ordered that the matter 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.
After review of the pleadings, the magistrate judge issued a report concluding that Dudley
failed to exhaust his available state remedies. The magistrate judge therefore recommended that
Dudley’s petition be dismissed without prejudice and that Dudley be denied a certificate of
appealability sua sponte.
A copy of the report was sent to Dudley at his last known address, return receipt requested,
but no objections have been filed; 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).

1

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
(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. 7) is ADOPTED as the
opinion of the District Court. It is further
ORDERED that the above-styled application for the writ of habeas corpus be and hereby is
DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. It is further
.

ORDERED that the Petitioner Antonio Dudley is hereby DENIED a certificate of

appealability sua sponte. This denial refers only to the dismissal of the present petition and has no
effect upon the Petitioner’s right to complete the exhaustion process or his right to seek relief in
federal court in the event that he does not obtain the relief which he seeks through the prison
grievance procedure. Finally, it is
ORDERED that any and all motions which may be pending in this action are hereby
DENIED.
SIGNED this 17th day of March, 2015.

____________________________________
MICHAEL H. SCHNEIDER
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2