Opinion
Civil Action 2:21-CV-00068
03-04-2022
MICKEY WAYNE BOSWELL, Petitioner, v. BOBBY LUMPKIN, Respondent.
ORDER ADOPTING MEMORANDUM & RECOMMENDATION
DAVIDS MORALES UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Before the Court is Magistrate Judge Julie Hampton's Memorandum and Recommendation (M&R). (D.E. 27). The parties were provided proper notice of, and the opportunity to object to, the Magistrate Judge's M&R. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b); General Order No. 2002-13. No. objection has been filed. See (D.E. 29; D.E. 30). When no timely objection has been filed, the district court need only determine whether the Magistrate Judge's M&R is clearly erroneous or contrary to law. United States v. Wilson, 864 F.2d 1219, 1221 (5th Cir. 1989) (per curiam); Powell v. Litton Loan Servicing, IP, No. CIV. A. H-14-2700, 2015 WL 3823141, at *1 (S.D. Tex. June 18, 2015) (Harmon, J.).
Having carefully reviewed the proposed findings and conclusions of the Magistrate Judge, the filings of the parties, the record, and the applicable law, and finding that the M&R is not clearly erroneous or contrary to law, the Court ADOPTS the M&R in its entirety. (D.E. 27).
Accordingly:
(1) The Court GRANTS Respondent's motion for summary judgment (D.E. 14) and DISMISSES with prejudice Petitioner's § 2254 petition (D.E. 1).
(2) A Certificate of Appealability is DENIED.
(3) A final judgment will be entered separately.
SO ORDERED.