Opinion
6:22-cv-00077
05-25-2023
Joshua Calhoun, Petitioner, v. Director, TDCJ-CID, Respondent.
ORDER
J. CAMPBELL BARKER UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
This habeas corpus action was referred to United States Magistrate Judge John D. Love pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b). Doc. 3. On April 3, 2023, the magistrate judge issued a report recommending that the court deny habeas relief and dismiss petitioner's case on the merits. Doc. 23. Petitioner filed written objections. Doc. 24.
The court reviews the objected-to portions of a magistrate judge's report and recommendation de novo. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b)(3); 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Petitioner's two-page objection simply restates his three claims for relief in summary form. Doc. 24. He does not analyze or even identify any portion of the magistrate judge's report that he asserts is incorrect as a matter of fact or law.
Having reviewed the magistrate judge's report de novo and being satisfied that it contains no error, the court overrules petitioner's objections and accepts the report's findings and recommendation. Petitioner's case is dismissed with prejudice.
So ordered