Jones v. Butcher et al

Filing 14

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER OVERRULING OBJECTIONS AND ACCEPTING 7 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION. Signed by District Judge Ron Clark on 10/22/20. (ljw, )

Case 9:20-cv-00071-RC-ZJH Document 14 Filed 10/22/20 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 49

**NOT FOR PRINTED PUBLICATION**
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
LUFKIN DIVISION
KEVIN JEROME JONES

§

VS.

§

WARDEN M. BUTCHER, et al.,

§

CIVIL ACTION NO. 9:20-CV-71

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
OVERRULING OBJECTIONS AND ACCEPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Petitioner, Kevin Jerome Jones, an inmate confined at the Eastham Unit with the Texas
Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division, proceeding pro se, filed this
petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254.
The court referred this matter to the Honorable Zack Hawthorn, United States Magistrate
Judge, at Beaumont, Texas, for consideration pursuant to applicable laws and orders of this court.
The Magistrate Judge recommends this action be dismissed without prejudice to petitioner’s right
to re-file his claims pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (docket entry no. 7).
The court has received and considered the Report and Recommendation of United States
Magistrate Judge filed pursuant to such order, along with the records, and pleadings. Petitioner filed
"notices" to the Report and Recommendation, which the court liberally construes as objections.
(docket entry nos. 10-13). This requires a de novo review of the objections in relation to the
pleadings and applicable law. See FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b).
Although petitioner’s objections are hard to discern, it appears petitioner continues to
complain about the conditions of his confinement which are properly pursued under 42 U.S.C. §
1983. It is noteworthy as outlined by the Magistrate Judge that petitioner is a serial litigant where
numerous cases filed by him have been dismissed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). It would appear
by filing his claims pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, petitioner may be attempting to circumvent
the § 1915(g) bar.

Case 9:20-cv-00071-RC-ZJH Document 14 Filed 10/22/20 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 50

ORDER
Accordingly, petitioner’s "notices" construed as objections are OVERRULED.

The

findings of fact and conclusions of law of the Magistrate Judge are correct, and the report of the
Magistrate Judge is ACCEPTED. A Final Judgment will be entered in accordance with the
recommendations of the Magistrate Judge.
So ORDERED and SIGNED, Oct 22, 2020.

____________________
Ron Clark
Senior Judge

2