Gordy v. Director, TDCJ-CID
ORDER ADOPTING 13 Report and Recommendations. Petitioner's habeas petition is DISMISSED. Petitioner's unexhausted claims are DISMISSED without prejudice and the exhausted claims are DISMISSED with prejudice. Petitioner is further DENIED a certificate of appealability sua sponte. Signed by District Judge Jeremy D. Kernodle on 1/16/2023. (wea, )
Case 6:20-cv-00380-JDK-JDL Document 15 Filed 01/16/23 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 1529
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
JERMAINE RAY GORDY, #2192339
CIVIL ACTION NO. 6:20cv380
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Texas Department of Criminal Justice proceeding pro se, filed this petition for writ of
habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The cause of action was referred to
United States Magistrate
conclusions of law, and recommendations for the disposition of the petition.
On November 30, 2022, Judge Love issued a Report recommending
that Petitioner’s habeas petition be dismissed.
Docket No. 13.
Judge Love recommended that Petitioner’s unexhausted claims be dismissed
without prejudice,and the exhausted claims be dismissed with prejudice. He
further recommended that Petitioner be denied a certificate of appealability sua
sponte. A copy of the Report was mailed to Petitioner, with an acknowledgment
card. The docket reflects that Petitioner received a copy of the Report on
December 5, 2022. Docket No. 14.
The Court reviews the findings and conclusions of the Magistrate Judge de
novo only if a party objects within fourteen days of the Report and Recommendation.
28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). In conducting a de novo review, the Court examines the entire
record and makes an independent assessment under the law. Douglass v. United
Case 6:20-cv-00380-JDK-JDL Document 15 Filed 01/16/23 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 1530
Servs. Auto. Ass’n, 79 F.3d 1415, 1430 (5th Cir. 1996) (en banc), superseded on other
grounds by statute, 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) (extending the time to file objections
from ten days to fourteen days).
Here, Petitioner has not filed objections. The Court therefore reviews the
Magistrate Judge’s findings for clear error or abuse of discretion and reviews his
legal conclusions to determine whether they are contrary to law. See United
States v. Wilson, 864 F.2d 1219, 1221 (5th Cir. 1989), cert. denied, 492 U.S. 918
(1989) (holding that, if no objections to a Magistrate Judge’s Report are filed, the
standard of review is “clearly erroneous, abuse of discretion and contrary to law.”).
Having reviewed the Magistrate Judge’s Report and the record in this case,
the Court finds no clear error or abuse of discretion and no conclusions contrary to
law. Accordingly, the Court hereby ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation of
the United States Magistrate Judge (Docket No. 13) as the findings of this
Court. Therefore, it is
ORDERED that Petitioner’s habeas petition is DISMISSED. Petitioner’s
unexhausted claims are DISMISSED without prejudice and the exhausted claims
certificate of appealability sua sponte. Finally, it is
ORDERED that any and all motions which may be pending in this civil action
are hereby DENIED.
So ORDERED and SIGNED this 16th day of January, 2023.
JEREMY D. KERNODLE
2UNITED 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?