Sanchez v. United States

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS LUBBOCK DIVISION

ANGEL LEE SANCHEZ, ) ) Movant, ) ) CIVIL ACTION NO. v. ) 5:19-CV-134-C ) CRIMINAL NO. §:18-CR-020-02-C UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) ) Respondent. )

ORDER Before the Court are the Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge therein advising the Court that Movant’s claim alleging that counsel provided ineffective assistance by failing to file a notice of appeal should be denied.’ The Court conducts a de novo review of those 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(b)(1)(C). 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 contrary to law. See United States v. Wilson, 864 F.2d 1219, 1221 (Sth Cir. 1989). After due consideration and having conducted a de novo review, the Court finds that Counsel’s objections, as well as Movant’s objections, should be OVERRULED. The Court has further conducted an independent review of the Magistrate Judge’s findings and conclusions and

' Movant’s court appointed counsel filed objections to the Magistrate Judge’s Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation on May 27, 2020. See Doc. 31. Movant timely filed separate objections to the Magistrate Judge’s Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation on August 25, 2020. See Doc. 34.

finds no error. It is therefore ORDERED that the Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation are hereby ADOPTED as the findings and conclusions of the Court. For the reasons stated therein, Movant’s claim that counsel provided ineffective assistance by failing to file a notice of appeal is hereby DENIED and ee, SO ORDERED this 4 day of August, 2020. jf iy f } “Fi ez] / / iff Yor ye ( 1 \ SAMR. C¥MMINGS / } IOR ED eye TRICT JUDGE