Alvarado v. Director TDCJ-CID
Filing
6
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS for 3 Report and Recommendations of the United States Magistrate Judge. ORDERED that the application for the writ of habeas corpus is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE, and that the Petitioner Jorge Alvarado is DENIED a certificate of appealability sua sponte. Signed by Judge Michael H. Schneider on 10/21/2015. (gsg)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
TYLER DIVISION
JORGE ANTONIO ALVARADO
§
v.
§
DIRECTOR, TDCJ-CID
§
CIVIL ACTION NO. 6:15cv416
MEMORANDUM ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
AND ENTERING FINAL JUDGMENT
The Petitioner Jorge Alvarado, 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.
Alvarado complained of a disciplinary conviction for the offense of making a false statement
during an official investigation, for which he received punishments of 15 days of recreation and
commissary restrictions and a reduction in classification status. He did not lose any good time, nor
is he eligible for release on mandatory supervision.
After review of the pleadings, the magistrate judge issued a report concluding that Alvarado
failed to show that the punishments imposed upon him as a result of the disciplinary case at issue
implicated any constitutionally protected liberty interests. See Sandin v. Conner, 115 S.Ct. 2293,
2301 (1995); Malchi v. Thaler, 211 F.3d 953, 959 (5th Cir. 2000). The magistrate judge therefore
recommended that the petition be dismissed and that Alvarado be denied a certificate of appealability
sua sponte.
1
Alvarado received a copy of the magistrate judge’s report but filed no objections thereto;
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
(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. 3) 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
WITH PREJUDICE. It is further
ORDERED that the Petitioner Jorge Alvarado is DENIED a certificate of appealability sua
sponte. Finally, it is
ORDERED that any and all motions which may be pending in this action are hereby
DENIED.
SIGNED this 21st day of October, 2015.
____________________________________
MICHAEL H. SCHNEIDER
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
2
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?