From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Raines v. Stephens

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI DIVISION
May 20, 2015
CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:14-CV-00330 (S.D. Tex. May. 20, 2015)

Opinion

CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:14-CV-00330

05-20-2015

DALAWRENCE RAINES, Petitioner, v. WILLIAM STEPHENS, Respondent.


ORDER ADOPTING MEMORANDUM AND RECOMMENDATION

On April 20, 2015, United States Magistrate Judge B. Janice Ellington issued her "Memorandum and Recommendation" (D.E. 20). The parties were provided proper notice of, and opportunity to object to, the Magistrate Judge's Memorandum and Recommendation. FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b); 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); General Order No. 2002-13. No objections have been filed.

When no timely objection to a magistrate judge's memorandum and recommendation 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 memorandum and recommendation. 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 Memorandum and Recommendation (D.E. 20), 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, the Respondent's Motion for Summary Judgment (D.E. 15) is GRANTED and this habeas corpus action is DENIED. In the event that Petitioner requests a Certificate of Appealability, that request is DENIED.

ORDERED this 20th day of May, 2015.

/s/_________

NELVA GONZALES RAMOS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE


Summaries of

Raines v. Stephens

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI DIVISION
May 20, 2015
CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:14-CV-00330 (S.D. Tex. May. 20, 2015)
Case details for

Raines v. Stephens

Case Details

Full title:DALAWRENCE RAINES, Petitioner, v. WILLIAM STEPHENS, Respondent.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI DIVISION

Date published: May 20, 2015

Citations

CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:14-CV-00330 (S.D. Tex. May. 20, 2015)

Citing Cases

Johnson v. Dir., TDCJ-CID

However, it is well established that inmates have no constitutional right to counsel in connection with…