IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SHERMAN DIVISION

CHRISTIAN TRAUTNER, #78021 § § VS. § CIVIL CASE NO. 4:25-CV-599-SDJ § SHERIFF, GRAYSON COUNTY § MEMORANDUM ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

This case was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Bill Davis, who issued a Report and Recommendation (Dkt. #13) recommending that the petition for writ of habeas corpus be dismissed without prejudice and that a certificate of appealability be denied. Movant filed objections. (Dkt. #14). Petitioner’s objections lack merit. The Magistrate Judge correctly applied the doctrine of Younger v. Harris,

(1971), in recommending abstention. Furthermore, even if this case were the rare pretrial habeas matter not barred by Younger, the Magistrate Judge correctly concluded that Petitioner has failed to exhaust his state remedies, which precludes federal habeas relief. Petitioner’s objections do not address the applicability of the Younger abstention doctrine. Nor do they address exhaustion, beyond Petitioner’s conclusory assertion that he “has exhausted all state procedures for relief” by twice filing a petition for writ of habeas corpus with the state trial court and receiving “no reply.” (Dkt. #14 at 1). A claim is not exhausted if no ruling has yet been made by the trial court. The remainder of Petitioner’s objection concerns matters that are immaterial to the grounds for dismissing his petition. The Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, which contains proposed findings of fact and recommendations for the disposition of such action, has been presented for consideration. Having made a de novo review of the objections

raised by Movant to the Report and Recommendation, the Court concludes that the findings and conclusions of the Magistrate Judge are correct and adopts the same as the findings and conclusions of the Court. It is therefore ORDERED that the petition for a writ of habeas corpus is DISMISSED without prejudice. It is further ORDERED that a certificate of appealability is DENIED. All motions by either party not previously ruled on are hereby DENIED.