Opinion
CIVIL ACTION NO. 6:17cv106
07-21-2017
JAMES CARTER v. DIRECTOR, TDCJ-CID
MEMORANDUM ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE AND ENTERING FINAL JUDGMENT
The Petitioner James Carter, proceeding pro se, filed this application for the writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. §2254 complaining of the legality of prison disciplinary action taken against him during his confinement in the Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division. This Court referred the matter to the United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §636(b)(1) and (3) and the Amended Order for the Adoption of Local Rules for the Assignment of Duties to United States Magistrate Judges.
Carter complained of a disciplinary conviction for the offense of threatening to inflict harm on an unknown person, for which he received punishments of 45 days of cell and commissary restrictions and a reduction in classification status from State Approved Trusty IV to Line Class II. He was also removed from a parole program. Carter did not lose any good time.
After review of the pleadings, the Magistrate Judge issued a report concluding that Carter failed to show that the punishments imposed upon him as a result of the disciplinary case at issue implicated any constitutionally protected liberty interests. See Sandin v. Conner, 515 U.S. 472, 484, 115 S.Ct. 2293, 132 L.Ed.2d 418 (1995); Malchi v. Thaler, 211 F.3d 953, 959 (5th Cir. 2000). The Magistrate Judge therefore recommended that the petition be dismissed and that Carter be denied a certificate of appealability sua sponte.
Carter received a copy of the Magistrate Judge's Report but filed no objections thereto; accordingly, he is barred from de novo review by the District Judge of those findings, conclusions, and recommendations and, except upon grounds of plain error, from appellate review of the unobjected-to proposed factual findings and legal conclusions accepted and adopted by the district court. Douglass v. United Services Automobile Association, 79 F.3d 1415, 1430 (5th Cir. 1996) (en banc).
The Court has reviewed the pleadings in this cause and the Report of the Magistrate Judge. Upon such review, the Court has determined that the Report of the Magistrate Judge is correct. See United States v. Wilson, 864 F.2d 1219, 1221 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 492 U.S. 918, 109 S.Ct. 3243 (1989) (where no objections to a Magistrate Judge's Report are filed, the standard of review is "clearly erroneous, abuse of discretion and contrary to law.") It is accordingly
ORDERED that the Report of the Magistrate Judge (docket no. 8) is ADOPTED as the opinion of the District Court. It is further
ORDERED that the above-styled application for the writ of habeas corpus is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. It is further
ORDERED that the Petitioner James Carter is DENIED a certificate of appealability sua sponte. Finally, it is
ORDERED that any and all motions which may be pending in this action are hereby DENIED.
So ORDERED and SIGNED this 21 day of July, 2017.
/s/_________
Ron Clark, United States District Judge