Laymance v. State of Texas, No. 6:2017cv00630 - Document 22 (E.D. Tex. 2018)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION ADOPTING THE 20 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS. Petitioner's motion for nonsuit, (17), which the court construes as a notice of voluntary dismissal, is GRANTED. Petitioner's federal petition for a writ of habeas corpus is DISMISSED on Petitioner's own motion. Finally, it is ORDERED that any and all motions which may be pending in this case are hereby DENIED. Signed by District Judge Thad Heartfield on 10/26/18. (ljw, )
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Laymance v. State of Texas Doc. 22 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION JEREMY LAYMANCE, #163960 § VS. § ANDERSON COUNTY, TEXAS § CIVIL ACTION NO. 6:17cv630 MEMORANDUM OPINION ADOPTING THE REPORT OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE Petitioner Jeremy Laymance, proceeding pro se, filed this petition for a writ of habeas corpus under section 2254. The case was referred to the United States Magistrate Judge, the Honorable Judge John D. Love. On July 18, 2018, Laymance filed a motion for nonsuit, (Dkt. #17), explaining that he wished to dismiss the cause of action because he “was acquitted at trial” on July 16, 2018. Subsequently, the United States Magistrate Judge issued a Report, (Dkt. #20), recommending that Laymance’s motion—construed as a motion for voluntary dismissal—should be granted. A copy of this Report was sent to Laymance’s address. However, to date, no objections to the Report have been filed. Laymance has not communicated with the court since he filed his motion for nonsuit in July 2018. Consequently, Laymance 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. 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 United States Magistrate Judge, (Dkt. #20), is ADOPTED as the opinion of the court. Further, it is ORDERED that Petitioner’s motion for nonsuit, (Dkt. #17), which the court construes as a notice of voluntary dismissal, is GRANTED. Petitioner’s federal petition for a writ of habeas corpus is DISMISSED on Petitioner’s own motion. Finally, it is ORDERED that any and all motions which may be pending in this case are hereby DENIED. SIGNED this the 26 day of October, 2018. ____________________________ Thad Heartfield United States District Judge 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.
