Britt v. Davis-Director TDCJ-CID

• Court: District Court, E.D. Texas
• Decided: August 18, 2025
• Docket: 4:22-cv-00727
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SHERMAN DIVISION JACAB AUSTIN BRITT, #02133843 § § VS. § CIVIL ACTION NO. 4:22cv727 § DIRECTOR, TDCJ-CID § MEMORANDUM ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE The above-entitled and numbered civil action was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Aileen Goldman Durrett, who issued a Report and Recommendation (“the Report”) (Dkt. #11) concluding that the petition for writ of habeas corpus should be denied and dismissed with prejudice. Petitioner, with the assistance of counsel, filed objections. (Dkt. #12). In the objections, Petitioner reurges the issues raised in his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition. The Court has reviewed the tendered objections, and they generally add nothing new to Petitioner’s prior contentions in this case. “An ‘objection’ that does nothing more than state a disagreement with a magistrate judge’s suggested resolution, or simply summarizes what has been presented before, is not an ‘objection’ as that term is used in this context.” Talbert v. Lynch, No. PE:16-CV- 00018-RAJ, 2017 WL 11236935, at *4 (W.D. Tex. Feb. 17, 2017) (quoting Aldrich v. Bock, 327 F. Supp. 2d 743, 747 (E.D. Mich. 2004)) (cleaned up). “Furthermore, objections that simply rehash or mirror the underlying claims addressed in the report do not justify de novo review.” Torgerson v. Henderson County, No. 6:21-CV-390-JDK-JDL, 2022 WL 1204774, at *1 (E.D. Tex. Apr. 22, 2022) (citing United States v. Morales, 947 F. Supp. 2d 166, 171 (D.P.R. 2013) (“Even though timely objections to a report and recommendation entitle the objecting party to de novo review of the findings, ‘the district court should be spared the chore of traversing ground already plowed by the Magistrate.’”) (internal citations omitted)). Despite his arguments, Petitioner fails to show that the Report is in error or that he is entitled to relief. The Report of the Magistrate Judge, which contains proposed findings of fact and recommendations for the disposition of such action, has been presented for consideration. Having

made a de novo review of the objections raised by Petitioner to the Report, the Court concludes that the findings and conclusions of the Magistrate Judge are correct. Therefore, the Court hereby adopts the findings and conclusions of the Magistrate Judge as the findings and conclusions of the Court. It is accordingly ORDERED that the petition for a writ of habeas corpus is DENIED and that the case is DISMISSED with prejudice. It is also ORDERED that a certificate of appealability is DENIED. It is further ORDERED that all other motions not previously ruled on are hereby DENIED. IT IS SO ORDERED.