Robinson v. Stephens et al
MEMORANDUM ORDER adopting 17 Report and Recommendation. This action is dismissed with prejudice for purposes of proceeding in forma pauperis and for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. Any pending motions are denied. Signed by District Judge Ron Clark on 3/7/18. (tkd, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
MARSHAUN LYNN ROBINSON
WILLIAM STEPHENS, ET AL.
CIVIL ACTION NO. 6:16cv456
MEMORANDUM ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
AND ENTERING FINAL JUDGMENT
The Plaintiff Marshaun Robinson, a former prisoner of the Texas Department of Criminal
Justice, Correctional Institutions Division proceeding pro se, filed this civil rights lawsuit under 42
U.S.C. §1983 complaining of alleged violations of his constitutional rights. 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. As Defendants, Robinson named former TDCJ-CID Director William
Stephens, Warden Jeffrey Richardson, counsel substitute Melanie Black, and an unknown
Robinson complained that a disciplinary case he received and grievances which he filed were
not properly investigated, a statement ascribed to him during the investigation of the disciplinary
case had been forged or falsified, his counsel substitute rendered ineffective assistance, and the
conduct of the disciplinary case violated TDCJ-CID rules and regulations.
After review of the pleadings, the Magistrate Judge issued a Report recommending that the
lawsuit be dismissed as frivolous and for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted.
A copy of this Report was sent to Robinson 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 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. 17) is ADOPTED as the
opinion of the District Court. It is further
ORDERED that the above-styled civil action is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE for
purposes of proceeding in forma pauperis as frivolous and for failure to state a claim upon which
relief may be granted. It is further
ORDERED that any and all motions which may be pending in this civil action are hereby
So ORDERED and SIGNED this 7 day of March, 2018.
Ron Clark, United States District Judge
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?