David Duran v. Larry Berger

E.D. Texas

David Duran v. Larry Berger

DecidedFebruary 2, 2026

Docket6:24-cv-00451

StatusUnknown

This text of David Duran v. Larry Berger (David Duran v. Larry Berger) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, E.D. Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

David Duran v. Larry Berger, (E.D. Tex. 2026).

Pincite

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS No. 6:24-cv-00451 David Duran, Petitioner, v. Larry Berger, Respondent.

ORDER David Duran petitions for a writ of habeas corpus regarding his state-court conviction for aggravated sexual assault. Doc. 1. The case was referred to a magistrate judge (Doc. 4), who issued a report recommending that the court dismiss Duran’s petition without prejudice to his right to seek permission from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit to file a successive petition and deny Duran a certificate of appealability sua sponte. Doc. 13 at 11. No party filed written objections, and the report mailed to petitioner was returned twice as “undeliverable.” Docs. 14, 15; see also Davis v. King, 270 F. App’x 355, 356 (5th Cir. 2008) (per cu- riam) (unpublished) (holding that it is a petitioner’s responsibility to update his address). Considering that the court has twice mailed a copy of the report to Duran’s last-known address, Duran has received sufficient notice of the report. Watkins ». Numerous Bureau of Prison Officials, 846 F. App’x 310, 311 (5th Cir. 2021) (per curiam) (unpublished) (“Notice mailed to his last known ad- dress was sufficient.” (citing VY. Life Ins. Co. v. Brown, 84 F.3d 137, 142 (5th Cir. 1996))). When there have been no timely objections to a report, “the court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b), advisory committee’s notes to 1983 amendment. Having reviewed the record and being satis- fied that there is no clear error, the court accepts the report’s find- ings and recommendations. The petition for a writ of habeas

-l-

corpus (Doc. 1) is dismissed without prejudice to petitioner’s right to seek permission from the Fifth Circuit to refile. A certifi- cate of appealability is denied sua sponte. Any pending motions are denied as moot. So ordered by the court on February 2, 2026. facbok BARKER United States District Judge

-2-

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS No. 6:24-cv-00451 David Duran, Petitioner, v. Larry Berger, Respondent.

ORDER David Duran petitions for a writ of habeas corpus regarding his state-court conviction for aggravated sexual assault. Doc. 1. The case was referred to a magistrate judge (Doc. 4), who issued a report recommending that the court dismiss Duran’s petition without prejudice to his right to seek permission from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit to file a successive petition and deny Duran a certificate of appealability sua sponte. Doc. 13 at 11. No party filed written objections, and the report mailed to petitioner was returned twice as “undeliverable.” Docs. 14, 15; see also Davis v. King, 270 F. App’x 355, 356 (5th Cir. 2008) (per cu- riam) (unpublished) (holding that it is a petitioner’s responsibility to update his address). Considering that the court has twice mailed a copy of the report to Duran’s last-known address, Duran has received sufficient notice of the report. Watkins ». Numerous Bureau of Prison Officials, 846 F. App’x 310, 311 (5th Cir. 2021) (per curiam) (unpublished) (“Notice mailed to his last known ad- dress was sufficient.” (citing VY. Life Ins. Co. v. Brown, 84 F.3d 137, 142 (5th Cir. 1996))). When there have been no timely objections to a report, “the court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b), advisory committee’s notes to 1983 amendment. Having reviewed the record and being satis- fied that there is no clear error, the court accepts the report’s find- ings and recommendations. The petition for a writ of habeas

-l-

corpus (Doc. 1) is dismissed without prejudice to petitioner’s right to seek permission from the Fifth Circuit to refile. A certifi- cate of appealability is denied sua sponte. Any pending motions are denied as moot. So ordered by the court on February 2, 2026. facbok BARKER United States District Judge

-2-

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

David Duran v. Larry Berger, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/david-duran-v-larry-berger-txed-2026.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack