Porter v. State Of Texas
ORDER ADOPTING 2 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS. Signed by Judge Ron Clark on 7/17/17. (ljw, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
STATE OF TEXAS
CIVIL ACTION NO. 9:17-CV-75
ORDER ADOPTING THE MAGISTRATE
JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Plaintiff Lewis-Jay Porter, a prisoner confined in the Texas Department of Criminal Justice,
Correctional Institutions Division, proceeding pro se, filed this civil action against the State of
The court ordered that this matter be referred to the Honorable Keith F. Giblin, United States
Magistrate Judge, at Beaumont, Texas, for consideration pursuant to applicable laws and orders of
this court. The Magistrate Judge construed the action as a successive petition for writ of habeas
corpus and recommended dismissing the petition as a successive petition.
The court has received and considered the Report and Recommendation of United States
Magistrate Judge filed pursuant to such order, along with the record, pleadings and all available
evidence. No objections to the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge were
filed by the parties. Plaintiff does not deny that this is a successive petition, but he requests the court
to stay this proceeding while he seeks authorization from the United States Court of Appeals for the
Fifth Circuit. Because plaintiff should have sought leave from the Fifth Circuit before filing this
action, the motion will be denied.
Accordingly, the findings of fact and conclusions of law of the Magistrate Judge are correct,
and the report of the Magistrate Judge (document no. 2) is ADOPTED. Plaintiff’s motions
regarding a stay (document nos. 4 and 5) are DENIED. A final judgment will be entered in this case
in accordance with the Magistrate Judge’s recommendation.
So ORDERED and SIGNED this 17 day of July, 2017.
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?