From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Guerra v. Lumpkin

United States District Court, Southern District of Texas
Jul 21, 2022
Civil Action 2:22-CV-00121 (S.D. Tex. Jul. 21, 2022)

Opinion

Civil Action 2:22-CV-00121

07-21-2022

AARON GUERRA, Petitioner, v. BOBBY LUMPKIN, Respondent.


ORDER ADOPTING MEMORANDUM AND RECOMMENDATION

NELVA GONZALES RAMOS UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

On June 13, 2022, United States Magistrate Judge Julie K. Hampton issued her “Memorandum and Recommendation” (M&R, D.E. 4) recommending dismissal after an initial screening. Petitioner was provided proper notice of, and opportunity to object to, the Magistrate Judge's M&R. Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b); 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); General Order No. 2002-13. No objections have been timely filed.

When no timely objection to a magistrate judge's M&R is filed, the district court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record and accept the magistrate judge's M&R. Guillory v. PPG Industries, Inc., 434 F.3d 303, 308 (5th Cir. 2005) (citing Douglass v. United Services Auto Ass'n, 79 F.3d 1415, 1420 (5th Cir. 1996)).

Having reviewed the findings of fact and conclusions of law set forth in the Magistrate Judge's M&R (D.E. 4), and all other relevant documents in the record, and finding no clear error, the Court ADOPTS as its own the findings and conclusions of the Magistrate Judge. Accordingly, Guerra's § 2241 petition (D.E. 1) is DISMISSED pursuant to the screening provisions in Rule 4 of the Rules Governing Section 2254.


Summaries of

Guerra v. Lumpkin

United States District Court, Southern District of Texas
Jul 21, 2022
Civil Action 2:22-CV-00121 (S.D. Tex. Jul. 21, 2022)
Case details for

Guerra v. Lumpkin

Case Details

Full title:AARON GUERRA, Petitioner, v. BOBBY LUMPKIN, Respondent.

Court:United States District Court, Southern District of Texas

Date published: Jul 21, 2022

Citations

Civil Action 2:22-CV-00121 (S.D. Tex. Jul. 21, 2022)