From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Garst v. United States

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS AMARILLO DIVISION
Jan 24, 2012
2:10-CV-279 (N.D. Tex. Jan. 24, 2012)

Opinion

2:10-CV-279

01-24-2012

PAULA GARST v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA


ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

DENYING MOTION TO DISMISS, and

DISMISSING MOTION TO VACATE. SET ASIDE OR CORRECT SENTENCE

Defendant has filed what has been construed as a motion to vacate, set aside or correct sentence by a person in federal custody. The Government has filed a motion to dismiss the case. On January 10, 2012, the United States Magistrate Judge entered a Report and Recommendation recommending therein that defendant's motion be dismissed for want of prosecution and the Government's Motion to Dismiss be denied. No objections to the Report and Recommendation have been filed of record as of this date.

The undersigned United States District Judge has made an independent examination of the record in this case. The Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation is hereby ADOPTED. Accordingly, the motion to vacate, set aside or correct sentence filed by defendant is, in all things, DISMISSED for want of prosecution. The Government's Motion to Dismiss is DENIED as moot.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

_______________

MARY LOU ROBINSON

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE


Summaries of

Garst v. United States

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS AMARILLO DIVISION
Jan 24, 2012
2:10-CV-279 (N.D. Tex. Jan. 24, 2012)
Case details for

Garst v. United States

Case Details

Full title:PAULA GARST v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS AMARILLO DIVISION

Date published: Jan 24, 2012

Citations

2:10-CV-279 (N.D. Tex. Jan. 24, 2012)

Citing Cases

Weare v. United States

In Mullen v. United States, 106 Fed. 892, 46 C.C.A. 22, the thought was emphasized that the court could only…

United States v. Nelson

"The petitioners assail the refusal of the trial judge to instruct that where the Government's evidence is…