□ Southern District of Texas ENTERED December 18, 202C UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT David J. Bradley, Clerk SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI DIVISION ROMERO BROWN, § § Petitioner, § VS. § CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:20-CV-277 § TEXAS BOARD OF PARDONS AND § PAROLES, § § Respondent. § ORDER ADOPTING MEMORANDUM AND RECOMMENDATION Before the Court is Magistrate Judge Jason Libby’s Memorandum and Recommendation (“M&R”). (D.E. 5). The M&R recommends that the Court construe Petitioner Romero Brown’s (“Petitioner”) petition as one under 28 U.S.C.§ 2254 because Petitioner is attacking the underlying Texas mandatory supervision and parole statutes and how each applies to sentences. The M&R further recommends that the Court dismiss the case prior to service pursuant to the screening provisions of Rule 4 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases because, after review of the petition and attached exhibits, Petitioner is not entitled to relief. Jd. at 1-2, n.1; Malchi v. Thaler,

(5th Cir. 2000). The parties were provided proper notice of, and the opportunity to object to, the Magistrate Judge’s M&R. See

(b)(1); FED. R. Civ. P. 72(b); General Order No. 2002-13. Petitioner timely filed objections to the M&R. (D.E. 7). Having carefully reviewed the proposed findings and conclusions of the M&R, the record, the applicable law, and having made a de novo review of the portions of the M&R to which 1/2

Petitioner’s objections were directed,

(b)(1), the Court OVERRULES Petitioner’s objections. (D.E. 7). Accordingly, the Court: (1) ADOPTS the M&R in its entirety. (D.E. 5). (2) DISMISSES the case in its entirety.

SO ORDERED. | DA S. MORALES UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Dated: Corpus Christi, Texas December 17, 2020

2/2