Alonzo v. Stencil

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION JEREMY ALONZO, #95520, § § § Plaintiff, § § v. § Case No. 6:25-cv-392-JDK-JDL § JERI STENCIL, et al., § § Defendants. § ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE Plaintiff Jeremy Alonzo, a former inmate within the Smith County Jail, proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, filed this civil rights lawsuit complaining of alleged violations of his constitutional rights. The case was referred to United States Magistrate Judge John D. Love for findings of fact, conclusions of law, and recommendations for the disposition of the case. On February 25, 2026, Judge Love issued a report (Docket No. 10) recommending that Plaintiff’s claims be dismissed with prejudice to their being asserted again until the Heck conditions are met. The Court mailed a copy of this report to Plaintiff at his last-known address, with an acknowledgment card. The docket reflects, however, that the mail was returned as “undeliverable,” with a notation that Plaintiff is no longer at the Jail. Docket No. 11. To date, Plaintiff neither filed objections nor otherwise responded to the report. The Court reviews the findings and conclusions of the Magistrate Judge de novo only if a party objects within fourteen days of the Report and Recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). In conducting a de novo review, the Court examines the entire record and makes an independent assessment under the law. Alexander v. Verizon Wireless Servs., LLC, 875 F.3d 2438, 249 (5th Cir. 2017). Here, no objections have been filed. The Court therefore reviews the Magistrate Judge’s findings for clear error or abuse of discretion and reviews the legal conclusions to determine whether they are contrary to law. See United States v. Wilson, 864 F.2d 1219, 1221 (5th Cir. 1989) (holding that, if no objections to a Magistrate Judge’s Report are filed, the standard of review is “clearly erroneous, abuse of discretion and contrary to law.”). Having reviewed the Magistrate Judge’s report and the record in this case, the Court finds no clear error or abuse of discretion and no conclusions contrary to law. Accordingly, the Court hereby ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge (Docket No. 10). It is therefore ORDERED that Plaintiff's claims are DISMISSED with prejudice to their being asserted again until the Heck conditions are met. All pending motions are DENIED as moot. So ORDERED and SIGNED this 18th day of May, 2026. JHREMYD. KERN DLE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE