Opinion
No. 3:01-CV-2166-L
January 9, 2004
FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
This cause of action was referred to the United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to the provisions of Title 28, United States Code, Section 636(b), as implemented by an order of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas. The Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge follow:
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
I. NATURE OF THE CASE
Petitioner filed a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254.
II. PARTIES
Petitioner is an inmate in the Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division ("TDCJ-CID"). Respondent Douglas Dretke is Director of the TDCJ-CID.
III. DISCUSSION
Petitioner states that on September 20, 1989, he was convicted of arson in the Criminal District Court No. 1, Dallas County Texas, Cause Number F89-99216.
Respondent states there is no record that Petitioner was ever convicted of arson. The cause number that Petitioner lists does not belong to Petitioner. Petitioner is currently incarcerated on three convictions: (1) burglary of a building, cause number F89-90371-LI, sentenced to twenty years confinement on October 16, 1989, by the Criminal District Court No. 2 of Dallas County, Texas; (2) burglary of a building, cause number F91-71085-QJ, sentenced to ten years confinement on December 18, 1991, by the Criminal District Court No. 3 of Dallas County, Texas; and (3) assault of a public servant, cause number 99-431, 347, sentenced to four years confinement, to run consecutively to the sentence imposed in cause number F91-71085-QJ, on May 25, 2001, by the 364th Judicial District Court of Lubbock County, Texas.
Petitioner has a history of filing federal petitions for writs of habeas corpus on nonexistent convictions. On February 20, 2001, Petitioner filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus in the Southern District of Texas challenging state convictions that did not exist. See Flores v. Johnson, No. B-01-CV-0067 (S.D. Tex. Fed. 20, 2001). On July 27, 2001, the Court dismissed the petition for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. On July 18, 2001, Petitioner filed another petition for writ of habeas corpus challenging a fictitious state conviction. See Flores v. Cockrell, No. G-01-440 (S.D. Tex. July 18, 2001). On August 23, 2001, the Court dismissed the petition for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The Court also sanctioned Petitioner for filing frivolous actions by barring Petitioner from filing any further actions in the Southern District of Texas without first seeking permission from the Chief Judge of the Southern District.
In this case, the record shows that Petitioner is challenging a nonexistent arson conviction. This petition should therefore be dismissed with prejudice for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. RECOMMENDATION
For the foregoing reasons, the petition should be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.