Jones v. Lumpkin

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT May 22, 2023 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS Nathan Ochsner, Clerk CORPUS CHRISTI DIVISION BRODERICK DARNELL JONES, § § Petitioner, § § v. § Civil Action No. 2:22-CV-00261 § BOBBY LUMPKIN, § § Respondent. § ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE Pending before the Court is the May 2, 2023, Memorandum and Recommendation (“M&R”) prepared by Magistrate Judge Mitchel Neurock. (Dkt. No. 10). Magistrate Judge Neurock made findings and conclusions and recommended that Respondent Lumpkin’s Motion to Dismiss with Brief in Support, (Dkt. No. 9) be granted, Petitioner’s habeas corpus petition, (Dkt. No. 1), be dismissed with prejudice as time-barred, and a certificate of appealability be denied. (Dkt. No. 10 at 1). The Parties were provided proper notice and the opportunity to object to the M&R. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b). No party filed an objection. As a result, review is straightforward: plain error. Guillory v. PPG Indus., Inc., 434 F.3d 303, 308 (5th Cir. 2005). No plain error appears. Accordingly, the Court accepts the M&R and adopts it as the opinion of the Court. It is therefore ordered that: (1) Magistrate Judge Neurock’s M&R, (Dkt. No. 10) is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED in its entirety as the holding of the Court; (2) Petitioner’s Habeas Corpus Petition, (Dkt. No. 1), is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE as time-barred; and (3) Any request for a certificate of appealability is DENIED. It is SO ORDERED. Signed on May 19, 2023.

DREW B. TIPTON UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE