govinfo:USCOURTS-txed-9_18-cv-00120-3

**NOT FOR PRINTED PUBLICATION**
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
LUFKIN DIVISION
CLARENCE WRIGHT §
VS. § CIVIL ACTION NO. 9:18-CV-120
TEXAS DEP’T OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, §
ET AL.
ORDER OVERRULING PLAINTIFF’S OBJECTIONS AND ACCEPTING
THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Plaintiff Clarence Wright, a prisoner confined at the Polunsky Unit of the Texas Department
of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division (TDCJ-CID), proceeding pro se and in forma
pauperis, filed this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and the Religious Land Use and
Institutionalized Persons Act of 2000 (RLUIPA), 42 U.S.C. § 2000cc, against TDCJ and Bryan Collier.
The Court ordered that this matter be referred to the Honorable Zack Hawthorn, United States
Magistrate Judge, for consideration pursuant to applicable laws and orders of this Court. The
Magistrate Judge has submitted a Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge. 
The Magistrate Judge recommends dismissing the claims against TDCJ.
The Court has received and considered the Report and Recommendation of United States
Magistrate Judge, along with the record and the pleadings. Plaintiff filed objections to the Magistrate
Judge’s Report and Recommendation. 
The Court has conducted a de novo review of the objections in relation to the pleadings and
the applicable law. See FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b). After careful consideration of all the pleadings and the PageID #: 
<pageID>
relevant case law, the Court concludes that the petitioner’s objections lack merit. The Eleventh
Amendment bars a citizen of a state from bringing an action in federal court against his own state, or
against a state agency or department. Pennhurst State School & Hosp. v. Halderman, 465 U.S. 89,
98-99 (1984). Although plaintiff is barred from suing TDCJ because it is a state agency, he may pursue
his claims for declaratory and injunctive relief against defendant Collier in his official capacity. See
Mayfield v. Texas Dep’t of Criminal Justice, 529 F.3d 599, 605 (5th Cir. 2008).
ORDER
Plaintiff’s objections (docket entry #29) are OVERRULED. The findings of fact and
conclusions of law of the Magistrate Judge are correct, and the report of the Magistrate Judge (docket
entry #28) is ACCEPTED. The Texas Department of Criminal Justice is DISMISSED from this
action.
2 PageID #: 
<pageID>

Passage view · GavelSight