Martinez-Rodriguez v. The United States Of America

1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
LAREDO DIVISION
JUAN DIEGO MARTINEZ-RODRIGUEZ §
§
§
§
§
VS.
THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:25-cv-107
CRIMINAL ACTION NO. 5:22-cr-1052-15
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
On August 27, 2025, the Court referred a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to
28 U.S.C. § 2255 to United States Magistrate Judge Christopher dos Santos for a
Report and Recommendation (see Civ. Dkt. No. 2; Dkt. No. 999). Judge dos Santos
issued his report (Civ. Dkt. No. 12; Dkt. No. 1003), recommending that: (1) the Court
find Petitioner’s writ of habeas corpus as not entitled to relief and deny it; (2) the
Government’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Civ. Dkt. No. 11; Dkt. No. 1002) be
granted; and (3) the Court sua sponte deny Petitioner a certificate of appealability
(see Civ. Dkt. No. 12; Dkt. No. 1003). The fourteen-day objection period has lapsed,
and no party objected to these recommendations. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); see also
Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(d) (affording litigants an extra three days to act when service is made
via mail).
Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b), the Court reviewed the
Report and Recommendation for clear error. CGI Logistics, LLC v. Fast Logistik,
No. 5:23-CV-43, 	2023 	WL 	8313341, 	at *2 	(S.D. 	Tex. 	Dec. 	1, 	2023) 	(Garcia
Marmolejo, J.) (citing United States v. Soto, 734 F. App’x 258, 259 (5th Cir. 2018));
see also Cao v. BSI Fin. Servs., Inc., 858 F. App’x 156, 158 (5th Cir. 2021). Finding
United States District Court
Southern District of Texas
ENTERED
January 06, 2026
Nathan Ochsner, Clerk
Case 5:25-cv-00107 Document 14 Filed 01/06/26 in TXSD Page 1 of 2

2
none, the Court hereby ADOPTS IN WHOLE Judge dos Santos’s Report and
Recommendation (Civ. Dkt. No. 12; Dkt. No. 1003).
Accordingly, Petitioner’s Motion Under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 to Vacate, Set Aside,
or Correct Sentence by a Person in Federal Custody (Civ. Dkt. No. 1; Dkt. No. 982) is
DENIED WITH PREJUDICE. The Government’s Motion for Summary Judgment
(Civ. Dkt. No. 11; Dkt. No. 1002) is GRANTED. Pursuant to Rule 4(b) of the Rules
Governing Section 2255 Proceedings, the Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to notify
Petitioner by sending him a copy of this order.
Finally, the Court finds that Petitioner plainly cannot demonstrate “that
‘jurists of reason would find it debatable whether the [§ 2255] petition states a valid
claim of the denial of a constitutional right.’” Wallace v. Mississippi, 43 F.4th 482, 492
(5th Cir. 	2022) 	(quoting 	Slack 	v. 	McDaniel, 	529 U.S. 	473, 484–85 	(2000)).
Accordingly, 	a 	certificate 	of 	appealability 	is 	DENIED. 	The 	Clerk 	of 	Court 	is
DIRECTED to TERMINATE this civil action. The Court will enter Final Judgment
under separate cover. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 58(a).
It is so ORDERED.
SIGNED January 6, 2026.
___________________________________
Marina Garcia Marmolejo
United States District Judge
Case 5:25-cv-00107 Document 14 Filed 01/06/26 in TXSD Page 2 of 2