Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation

of the United States Magistrate Judge -Page 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

DALLAS DIVISION

CARLOS SANCHEZ, #914753, §

Petitioner, §

§ No. 3:03-CV-2885-K

v. §

§

DOUGLAS DRETKE, Director, Texas Dept. of §

Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions §

Division, §

Respondent. §

FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION

OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

This cause of action was referred to the United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to the

provisions of Title 28, United States Code, Section 636(b), as implemented by an order of the

United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas. The Findings, Conclusions and

Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge follow:

FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS

Petitioner filed this petition pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. He argues that Respondent 

has wrongfully denied his release to mandatory supervision. Petitioner seeks immediate release.

Petitioner’s maximum discharge date is November 5, 2005. The Court contacted the

Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division (“TDCJ-CID”) to

determine whether Petitioner is still incarcerated. The TDCJ-CID informed the Court that

Petitioner was released on November 1, 2004. 

The Court finds that Petitioner has received the relief that he seeks in this petition. The

petition should therefore be dismissed as moot.

 

 Case 3:03-cv-02885-K Document 11 Filed 09/22/05 Page 1 of 3 PageID 51
Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation

of the United States Magistrate Judge -Page 2

RECOMMENDATION

For the foregoing reasons, the Court recommends that the petition be dismissed as moot. 

Signed September 22, 2005.

_____________________________________

PAUL D. STICKNEY

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

 

 Case 3:03-cv-02885-K Document 11 Filed 09/22/05 Page 2 of 3 PageID 52
Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation

of the United States Magistrate Judge -Page 3

INSTRUCTIONS FOR SERVICE AND

NOTICE OF RIGHT TO APPEAL/OBJECT

The United States District Clerk shall serve a true copy of these findings, conclusions and

recommendation on the parties. Pursuant to Title 28, United States Code, Section 636(b)(1), any

party who desires to object to these findings, conclusions and recommendation must serve and

file written objections within ten days after being served with a copy. A party filing objections

must specifically identify those findings, conclusions or recommendation to which objections are

being made. The District Court need not consider frivolous, conclusory or general objections. A

party's failure to file such written objections to these proposed findings, conclusions and

recommendation shall bar that party from a de novo determination by the District Court. See

Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 150, (1985). Additionally, any failure to file written objections to

the proposed findings, conclusions and recommendation within ten days after being served with

a copy shall bar the aggrieved party from appealing the factual findings and legal conclusions of

the Magistrate Judge that are accepted by the District Court, except upon grounds of plain error.

Douglass v. United Servs. Auto. Ass'n, 79 F.3d 1415, 1417 (5th Cir. 1996) (en banc).

 

 Case 3:03-cv-02885-K Document 11 Filed 09/22/05 Page 3 of 3 PageID 53