From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Foxworth v. Dir., TDCJ-CID

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS LUFKIN DIVISION
Jun 14, 2013
CIVIL ACTION NO. 9:09cv56 (E.D. Tex. Jun. 14, 2013)

Opinion

CIVIL ACTION NO. 9:09cv56

06-14-2013

JIMMIE FOXWORTH v. DIRECTOR, TDCJ-CID


MEMORANDUM ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

AND ENTERING FINAL JUDGMENT

The Petitioner Jimmie Foxworth, proceeding pro se, filed this application for the writ of habeas corpus challenging the legality of his conviction. This Court ordered that the matter 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.

Foxworth complains of a conviction for aggravated sexual assault of a child, for which he received a sentence of 35 years in prison. In his federal habeas corpus petition, he asserted 13 grounds for relief, including alleged trial court errors as well as ineffective assistance of counsel.

The Magistrate Judge ordered the Respondent to answer the petition, and Foxworth filed a response to the answer. After review of the pleadings and the state court records, the Magistrate Judge issued a Report on April 1, 2013, recommending that Foxworth's petition be dismissed and that Foxworth be denied a certificate of appealability sua sponte. Foxworth received a copy of the Report on May 7, 2013, after remailing, 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 and records in this cause as well as 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. 24) 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 hereby DISMISSED with prejudice. It is further

ORDERED that the Petitioner Jimmie Foxworth is hereby DENIED a certificate of appealability sua sponte. Finally, it is

ORDERED that any and all other motions which may be pending in this civil action are hereby DENIED.

________________

Ron Clark, United States District Judge


Summaries of

Foxworth v. Dir., TDCJ-CID

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS LUFKIN DIVISION
Jun 14, 2013
CIVIL ACTION NO. 9:09cv56 (E.D. Tex. Jun. 14, 2013)
Case details for

Foxworth v. Dir., TDCJ-CID

Case Details

Full title:JIMMIE FOXWORTH v. DIRECTOR, TDCJ-CID

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS LUFKIN DIVISION

Date published: Jun 14, 2013

Citations

CIVIL ACTION NO. 9:09cv56 (E.D. Tex. Jun. 14, 2013)

Citing Cases

Hebert v. Vannoy

R. Doc. 16-1, p. 18. Foxworth v. Dir., TDCJ-CID, No. 09-56, 2013 WL 3013585, at *22 (E.D. Tex. June 14,…

Wright v. United States

Further DNA testing might have inculpated Wright even more and undercut his sufficiency-of-the-evidence…