Opinion
Civil Action 2:21-CV-212
11-04-2021
JAIME CISNEROS, Petitioner, v. BOBBY LUMPKIN, DIRECTOR, TDCJ, Respondent.
ORDER ADOPTING MEMORANDUM & RECOMMENDATION
DAVID S. MORALES, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.
Before the Court is Magistrate Judge Julie Hampton's Memorandum and Recommendation (M&R). (D.E. 4). The M&R recommends that the Court dismiss the petition pursuant to the screening provisions in Rule 4 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases. (D.E. 1;D.E. 4).
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. 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, LP, No. CIV. A. H-14-2700, 2015 WL 3823141, at *1 (S.D. Tex. June 18, 2015).
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 1 entirety. (D.E. 4). Accordingly, the Court DISMISSES Cisneros's habeas corpus petition pursuant to the screening provisions in Rule 4 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases. (D.E. 1). A final judgment will be entered separately. 2