From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Daniels v. Dretke

United States District Court, N.D. Texas, Amarillo Division
Oct 7, 2004
No. 2:03-CV-0444 (N.D. Tex. Oct. 7, 2004)

Opinion

No. 2:03-CV-0444.

October 7, 2004


REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION TO DISMISS PETITION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS


Petitioner ROBERT LEE DANIELS has filed with this Court an "Application for a Writ of Habeas Corpus" and an "Amended Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus by a Person in State Custody." Both pleadings are incoherent, fail to clearly state the claim on which petitioner contends he is being unlawfully held, and fail to state the relief petitioner is seeking by way of federal habeas corpus. Even viewing the pleadings liberally, the undersigned United States Magistrate Judge is unable to determine the bases upon which petitioner claims he is being held unlawfully or the relief petitioner seeks. Consequently, on April 7, 2004, the undersigned entered an Order directing petitioner to submit a "Supplemental Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus" setting forth the grounds on which he bases his belief that he is being held unlawfully. Petitioner was advised that each ground must then be supported by specific facts and a legal basis. Petitioner was instructed to attach to his supplemental petition copies of any documents and/or authorities upon which he relies to support his argument, or to reference a specific citation to said authorities. Petitioner was also directed to set forth, with specificity, the relief or result he is seeking by his federal habeas application and to file such supplemental petition with the Court on or before April 28, 2004. Petitioner was warned that failure to timely comply with the Court's Order would result in the entry of a recommendation to dismiss this case without further notice.

On April 16, 2004, petitioner filed a "Motion to Adopting of Briefings." Such motion is also incoherent, fails to clearly state the claim on which petitioner contends he is being unlawfully held, and fails to state the relief petitioner is seeking by way of federal habeas corpus.

Petitioner has not filed an Amended Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus by a Person in State Custody and is in direct disregard of the Court's Briefing Order. Petitioner has not communicated with the Court since April 16, 2004, when he submitted the above-referenced incoherent motion to the Court. Petitioner has not filed any change of address information nor kept in contact with the Court in any manner.

It is the opinion of the undersigned that petitioner has neglected his case to such an extent that it warrants dismissal. Alternatively, it is the opinion of the undersigned that petitioner's federal habeas application should be dismissed for failure to state a claim.

RECOMMENDATION

It is the RECOMMENDATION of the United States Magistrate Judge to the United States District Judge that the Application and the Amended Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus filed by petitioner ROBERT LEE DANIELS be DISMISSED for want of prosecution.

INSTRUCTIONS FOR SERVICE

The United States District Clerk is directed to send a file-marked copy of this Report and Recommendation to petitioner by the most efficient means available.

IT IS SO RECOMMENDED.


Summaries of

Daniels v. Dretke

United States District Court, N.D. Texas, Amarillo Division
Oct 7, 2004
No. 2:03-CV-0444 (N.D. Tex. Oct. 7, 2004)
Case details for

Daniels v. Dretke

Case Details

Full title:ROBERT LEE DANIELS, Petitioner, v. DOUGLAS DRETKE, Director, Texas…

Court:United States District Court, N.D. Texas, Amarillo Division

Date published: Oct 7, 2004

Citations

No. 2:03-CV-0444 (N.D. Tex. Oct. 7, 2004)