Opinion
NO. 4:04-CV-764-A.
March 15, 2005
ORDER
Came on for consideration the above-captioned action wherein Donnie Lee Glassey is petitioner and Douglas Dretke is respondent. This is a petition for writ of habeas corpus filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. On February 15, 2005, the United States Magistrate Judge issued his proposed findings, conclusions, and recommendation, and ordered that the parties file objections, if any, thereto by March 8, 2005. On March 2, 2005, petitioner filed his written objections. Respondent has not made any further response. In accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Rule 72 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the court makes a de novo determination of those portions of the proposed findings or recommendations to which specific objection is made. United States v. Raddatz, 447 U.S. 667 (1980). The court is not addressing any nonspecific objections or any frivolous or conclusory objections. Battle v. United States Parole Comm'n, 834 F.2d 419, 421 (5th Cir. 1987).
Petitioner's objections are directed to the portion of the magistrate's findings, conclusions, and recommendation that relate to his claims of ineffective assistance of counsel and actual innocence. Essentially, his objections are more elaborate repetitions of the arguments advanced in his reply to respondent's answer. See Pet.'s Reply at 1-2, 5-6. The court concludes that such arguments were adequately addressed in the findings, conclusions, and recommendation of the magistrate judge, and petitioner's objections are without merit. Therefore,
The court accepts the findings, conclusions, and recommendation of the magistrate judge and ORDERS that the petition in this action be, and is hereby, denied.