Chavis v. Director, No. 6:2017cv00090 - Document 23 (E.D. Tex. 2018)

Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION adopting 21 Report and Recommendation. Ordered that Petitioner's petition for a writ of habeas corpus is dismissed with prejudice. Ordered that any and all motions which may be pending in this civil action are hereby denied. Signed by District Judge Ron Clark on 6/4/2018. (bjc)

Download PDF
Chavis v. Director Doc. 23 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION JOSEPH M. CHAVIS, #122330 § VS. § DIRECTOR, TDCJ-CID § CIVIL ACTION NO. 6:17cv090 MEMORANDUM OPINION ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE AND ENTERING FINAL JUDGMENT Petitioner Joseph M. Chavis, an inmate confined at the Coffield Unit of the Texas prison system (TDJC), proceeding pro se, filed this petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 complaining of the legality of prison disciplinary measures taken against him. The petition was referred for findings of fact, conclusions of law, and recommendations for the disposition of the case. After reviewing the pleadings in this case, the Magistrate Judge issued a Report, (Dkt. #21), recommending that Petitioner’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus be dismissed with prejudice and that a certificate of appealability be denied. A copy of this Report was sent to Petitioner at his address; return receipt requested. The docket shows that Petitioner received a copy of the Report on July 31, 2017, (Dkt. #22). However, to date, no objections to the Report have been filed. Accordingly, 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 Automobile Association, 79 F.3d 1415, 1430 (5th Cir. 1996) (en banc). 1 Dockets.Justia.com 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) (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 ORDERED that the Report of the Magistrate Judge, (Dkt. #21), is ADOPTED as the opinion of the Court. Further, it is ORDERED that Petitioner’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus is DISMISSED with prejudice. Finally, it is ORDERED that any and all motions which may be pending in this civil action are hereby DENIED. So Ordered and Signed Jun 4, 2018 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.