Opinion
NO. 4:08-CV-251-A.
May 15, 2008
ORDER
Came on for consideration the above-captioned action wherein Gerald Anthony Wright is petitioner and Nathaniel Quarterman, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division, is respondent. This is a petition for writ of habeas corpus filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. On April 16, 2008, the United States Magistrate Judge issued his proposed findings, conclusions, and recommendation ("proposed FC R"), and ordered that the parties file objections, if any, thereto by May 6, 2008. Petitioner filed his objections, and 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).
The magistrate judge concluded that the petition should be dismissed as a successive petition filed without authorization from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.See 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(1). Petitioner admits that he filed a previous § 2254 petition and makes no specific objections to the magistrate's proposed FC R. Instead, he reargues the original grounds on which his petition is based.
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, dismissed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(1).