Richardson v. Guerrero

OCR transcription for search; preserved printed pages are authoritative

Case 2:25-cv-00222 Document 26 Filed 04/22/26 in TXSD Page1of2
United States District Court

Southem District of Texas
ENTERED
Apni 22, 2026
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT Nathan Ochsner, Clerk
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
CORPUS CHRISTI DIVISION
§
STEPHEN WAYNE RICHARDSON, §
§
Petitioner, §
§
V. § CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:25-CV-00222
§
ERIC GUERRERO, DIRECTOR, TDCJ-CID, §
§

Respondent.

ORDER ADOPTING MEMORANDUM & RECOMMENDATION

Before the Court is Magistrate Judge Julie K. Hampton’s Memorandum and
Recommendation (“M&R”). (D.E. 22). The M&R recommends that the Court dismiss Petitioner’s
§ 2241 petition. (D-E. 1).

The parties were provided proper notice of, and the opportunity to object to, the Magistrate
Judge’s M&R. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b); General Order No. 2002-13. No
objection has been filed. When no timely objection has been filed, the district court need only
determine whether the Magistrate Judge’s M&R is clearly erroneous or contrary to law. United
States v. Wilson, 864 F.2d 1219, 1221 (5th Cir. 1989) (per curiam); Powell vy. Litton Loan
Servicing, L.P., No. 4:14-CV-02700, 2015 WL 3823141, at *1 (S.D. Tex. June 18, 2015) (Harmon,
J.) (citation omitted).

Having reviewed the proposed findings and conclusions of the Magistrate Judge, the filings
of the Parties, the record, and the applicable law, and finding that the M&R is not clearly erroneous
or contrary to law, the Court ADOPTS the M&R in its entirety. (D.E. 22). Accordingly, the Court
DISMISSES Petitioner’s § 2241 petition. (D.E. 1).

The Court will enter final judgment separately.

1/2

AUTHENTICATED
U.S. GOVERNMENT
INFORMATION

GPO

Case 2:25-cv-00222 Document 26 Filed 04/22/26 in TXSD Page 2 of 2

SO ORDERED. < MW

DAVID-SSMORALES
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Signed: Corpus Chijsti, Texas
AprifZ22™3 2026

2/2