Roberson v. Rowlett TX Police Department et al, No. 3:2020cv03578 - Document 12 (N.D. Tex. 2021)
Court Description: ORDER Adopting 7 Findings and Recommendations. (Ordered by Senior Judge Sam R Cummings on 1/11/2021) (oyh)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Roberson v. Rowlett TX Police Department et al Doc. 12 IN THE TINITED STATES DIS'IRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION BILLY JOHN ROBERSON, ) ) Plainti1l ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ROWLETT TEXAS POLICE DEPARTMENT, et al, Defendant. Civil Action No. 3:20-CV-3578-C-BN ORDER Before the Court are the Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge therein advising that Plaintifls construedpro se application for wit of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. $ 2254, as amended, should be dismissed without prejudice subject to Plaintiffs right to seek authorization to file a successive application.' The Court conducts a de novo review ofthose portions of the Magistrate Judge's report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which a timely objection is made. 28 U'S.C. $ 636(bXtXC). Portions of the report or proposed findings or recommendations that are not the subject of a timely objection will be accepted by the Court unless they are clearly erroneous or contraryto law. See (lnited States v. lVilson,864 F.2d 1219,1221 (5th Cir. 1989). After due consideration and having conducted a de novo review,lhe Court finds that Plaintiff s objections should be OVERRULED.2 The Court has further conducted an I The Court notes that Plaintiff appears to continue to file amended complaints in an effort to avoid dismissal. I The Court construes Plaintiff s Motion of Challenging Decision Made to be objections to the Magistrate Judge's Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation. See Doc.9. Dockets.Justia.com independent review of the Magistrate Judge's findings and conclusions and finds no error. It is therefore ORDERED that the Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation and Supplemental Findings thereto3 are ADOPTED as the findings and conclusions ofthe Court. For the reasons slated therein, the Court ORDERS that Plaintiff s construed pro se application for writ ofhabeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. $ 2254, as amended, be DISMISSED without prejudice subject to Plaintilf s right to seek authorization to file a successive application in the United States Court of Appeals for thc Fifth Circui l.t SO ORDERED thiS ll tl auv of January, 2021 . GS S R STATES DI I 3 See Doc- 7. 2 CT JUDGE
]]>
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.
