Ibenyenwa v. Texas Board of Criminal Justice

E.D. Texas

Ibenyenwa v. Texas Board of Criminal Justice

DecidedJanuary 20, 2023

Docket9:22-cv-00042

StatusUnknown

This text of Ibenyenwa v. Texas Board of Criminal Justice (Ibenyenwa v. Texas Board of Criminal Justice) 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

Ibenyenwa v. Texas Board of Criminal Justice, (E.D. Tex. 2023).

Pincite

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MICHEAL J. IBENYENWA, § § Plaintiff, § § versus § CIVIL ACTION NO. 9:22-CV-42 § TEXAS BD. OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, § § Defendant. § MEMORANDUM ORDER OVERRULING PLAINTIFF’S OBJECTIONS AND ADOPTING THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION Plaintiff Micheal J. Ibenyenwa, a prisoner confined at the Polunsky Unit of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division (TDCJ-CID), proceeding pro se, filed this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against the Texas Board of Criminal Justice. The court ordered that this matter be referred to the Honorable Christine L. Stetson, United States Magistrate Judge, at Beaumont, Texas, for consideration pursuant to applicable laws and orders of this court. The magistrate judge has submitted a Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge. The magistrate judge recommends dismissing the action without prejudice pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). The court has received and considered the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge, along with the record, pleadings, and all available evidence. Plaintiff filed objections to the magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation. The court has conducted a de novo review of the objections in relation to the pleadings and the applicable law. See FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b). After careful consideration, the court concludes the objections are without merit. Plaintiff is barred from proceeding in forma pauperis unless he is in imminent danger of serious physical injury. /benyenwa v. Wells, No. 21-40241, 2022 WL 413941 at *2 (Sth Cir.), cert. denied, _U.S. _ , 143 S. Ct. 236 (2022). Because Plaintiff has not demonstrated that he is in imminent danger, he may not proceed in forma pauperis. Further, Plaintiff has not paid the $402.00 filing fee. Accordingly, this action will be dismissed. ORDER Accordingly, Plaintiff’s objections (#11) are OVERRULED. The findings of fact and conclusions of law of the magistrate judge are correct, and the report of the magistrate judge (#8) is ADOPTED. A final judgment will be entered in this case in accordance with the magistrate judge’s recommendation.

SIGNED at Beaumont, Texas, this 20th day of January, 2023.

PMs b. Carne. MARCIA A.CRONE- UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MICHEAL J. IBENYENWA, § § Plaintiff, § § versus § CIVIL ACTION NO. 9:22-CV-42 § TEXAS BD. OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, § § Defendant. § MEMORANDUM ORDER OVERRULING PLAINTIFF’S OBJECTIONS AND ADOPTING THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION Plaintiff Micheal J. Ibenyenwa, a prisoner confined at the Polunsky Unit of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division (TDCJ-CID), proceeding pro se, filed this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against the Texas Board of Criminal Justice. The court ordered that this matter be referred to the Honorable Christine L. Stetson, United States Magistrate Judge, at Beaumont, Texas, for consideration pursuant to applicable laws and orders of this court. The magistrate judge has submitted a Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge. The magistrate judge recommends dismissing the action without prejudice pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). The court has received and considered the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge, along with the record, pleadings, and all available evidence. Plaintiff filed objections to the magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation. The court has conducted a de novo review of the objections in relation to the pleadings and the applicable law. See FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b). After careful consideration, the court concludes the objections are without merit. Plaintiff is barred from proceeding in forma pauperis unless he is in imminent danger of serious physical injury. /benyenwa v. Wells, No. 21-40241, 2022 WL 413941 at *2 (Sth Cir.), cert. denied, _U.S. _ , 143 S. Ct. 236 (2022). Because Plaintiff has not demonstrated that he is in imminent danger, he may not proceed in forma pauperis. Further, Plaintiff has not paid the $402.00 filing fee. Accordingly, this action will be dismissed. ORDER Accordingly, Plaintiff’s objections (#11) are OVERRULED. The findings of fact and conclusions of law of the magistrate judge are correct, and the report of the magistrate judge (#8) is ADOPTED. A final judgment will be entered in this case in accordance with the magistrate judge’s recommendation.

SIGNED at Beaumont, Texas, this 20th day of January, 2023.

PMs b. Carne. MARCIA A.CRONE- UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Ibenyenwa v. Texas Board of Criminal Justice, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ibenyenwa-v-texas-board-of-criminal-justice-txed-2023.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack