Opinion
Civil Action 6:22-CV-00131-JDK
07-11-2023
CLINTON RYAN WARD, Petitioner, v. DIRECTOR, TDCJ, Respondent.
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
JEREMY D. KERNODLE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Petitioner Clinton Ray Ward, proceeding pro se, filed this habeas action on April 8, 2022. Docket No. 1. The case was referred to United States Magistrate Judge John D. Love for findings of fact, conclusions of law, and recommendations for the disposition of the action. On June 5, 2023, Judge Love issued a Report recommending that the petition for a writ of habeas corpus be denied as time-barred and that the case be dismissed with prejudice. Judge Love further recommended that Petitioner be denied a certificate of appealability, sua sponte. Docket No. 18. Petitioner filed a motion for extension of time to file objections. Docket No. 19. The Court granted the motion, and objections were due by no later than July 5, 2023. Docket No. 20. No objections to the Report were filed, and the time period for filing objections has passed.
Because objections to Judge Love's Report have not been filed, Petitioner 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 Auto. Ass'n, 79 F.3d 1415, 1430 (5th Cir. 1996) (en banc).
The Court has reviewed the pleadings in this cause and 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) (holding that 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.”).
Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge's Report (Docket No. 18) is ADOPTED. This federal habeas action is DISMISSED with prejudice. Petitioner is DENIED a certificate of appealability sua sponte.
So ORDERED.