Laymance v. State of Texas
Filing
22
MEMORANDUM OPINION ADOPTING THE 20 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS. Petitioner's motion for nonsuit, (17), which the court construes as a notice of voluntary dismissal, is GRANTED. Petitioner's federal petition for a writ of habeas corpus is DISMISSED on Petitioner's own motion. Finally, it is ORDERED that any and all motions which may be pending in this case are hereby DENIED. Signed by District Judge Thad Heartfield on 10/26/18. (ljw, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
TYLER DIVISION
JEREMY LAYMANCE, #163960
§
VS.
§
ANDERSON COUNTY, TEXAS
§
CIVIL ACTION NO. 6:17cv630
MEMORANDUM OPINION ADOPTING THE REPORT
OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Petitioner Jeremy Laymance, proceeding pro se, filed this petition for a writ of habeas
corpus under section 2254. The case was referred to the United States Magistrate Judge, the
Honorable Judge John D. Love.
On July 18, 2018, Laymance filed a motion for nonsuit, (Dkt. #17), explaining that he
wished to dismiss the cause of action because he “was acquitted at trial” on July 16, 2018.
Subsequently, the United States Magistrate Judge issued a Report, (Dkt. #20), recommending that
Laymance’s motion—construed as a motion for voluntary dismissal—should be granted. A copy
of this Report was sent to Laymance’s address. However, to date, no objections to the Report have
been filed. Laymance has not communicated with the court since he filed his motion for nonsuit
in July 2018.
Consequently, Laymance 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 Auto. 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.”). Accordingly, it is
ORDERED that the Report of the United States Magistrate Judge, (Dkt. #20), is
ADOPTED as the opinion of the court. Further, it is
ORDERED that Petitioner’s motion for nonsuit, (Dkt. #17), which the court construes as
a notice of voluntary dismissal, is GRANTED. Petitioner’s federal petition for a writ of habeas
corpus is DISMISSED on Petitioner’s own motion. Finally, it is
ORDERED that any and all motions which may be pending in this case are hereby
DENIED.
SIGNED this the 26 day of October, 2018.
____________________________
Thad Heartfield
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?