Opinion
CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:17cv23
11-07-2018
DUANE EDWARDS v. JERRY ROCHELLE, ET AL.
MEMORANDUM ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE AND ENTERING FINAL JUDGMENT
The Plaintiff Duane Edwards filed this civil rights lawsuit under 42 U.S.C. §1983 complaining of alleged violations of his constitutional rights. This Court ordered that the case be referred 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. As Defendants, Plaintiff sued Bowie County District Attorney Jerry Rochelle and the Bowie County Sheriff's Office.
In his complaint, Plaintiff stated District Attorney Rochelle failed to indict him on criminal charges within 180 days and did not get him on the court docket within 180 days. He also complained Rochelle did not appoint an attorney for him. Plaintiff asserted the Bowie County Sheriff's Department "failed to serve indictment if indicted by grand jury/district attorney." His lawsuit sought compensation for the anxiety of waiting every week to go to court, as well as every day he spent in jail past the legal limit, without counsel or a docket date.
After review of the pleadings, the Magistrate Judge issued a Report recommending the lawsuit be dismissed without prejudice for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. A copy of this Report was sent to Plaintiff's last known address, after his release from jail, but no objections have been received; 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 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 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 civil action is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. It is further
ORDERED that any and all motions which may be pending in this civil action are hereby DENIED.
So ORDERED and SIGNED this 7th day of November, 2018.
/s/_________
RODNEY GILSTRAP
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE