Gilbert v. United States of America et al

Filing 29

ORDER - IT IS ORDERED that the 28 report and recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Robert H. Walker entered on April 14, 2020, be, and the same is hereby adopted as the finding of this court. Accordingly, it is ordered that respondent 's 27 motion to dismiss is granted and the petition for writ of habeas corpus, filed pursuant to § 2254, is hereby dismissed. It is further ordered that a certificate of appealability is denied. A separate judgment will be entered in accordance with Rule 58 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Signed by District Judge Tom S. Lee on 5/11/2020 (ND)

Case 3:17-cv-00016-TSL-RHW Document 29 Filed 05/11/20 Page 1 of 2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI
NORTHERN DIVISION
WALTER LEE GILBERT
A/K/A LEMARCUS HILLIARD #99903-555
VS.

PETITIONER

CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:17CV16TSL-RHW

PELICIA HALL

RESPONDENT
ORDER

This cause came on this date to be heard upon the report and
recommendation of United States Magistrate Robert H. Walker, and
the court, no objection having been filed and having fully
reviewed the report and recommendation entered in this cause on
April 14, 2020, and no objection having been filed and being duly
advised in the premises, finds that said report and recommendation
should be adopted as the opinion of this court.
IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that the report and recommendation
of United States Magistrate Judge Robert H. Walker entered on April
14, 2020, be, and the same is hereby adopted as the finding of
this court. Accordingly, it is ordered that respondent’s motion to
dismiss is granted and the petition for writ of habeas corpus,
filed pursuant to § 2254, is hereby dismissed.
It is further ordered that a certificate of appealability is
denied.

Petitioner has failed to demonstrate that “jurists of

reason would find it debatable whether the petition states a valid
claim of the denial of a constitutional right” or that "jurists of

Case 3:17-cv-00016-TSL-RHW Document 29 Filed 05/11/20 Page 2 of 2

reason would find it debatable whether [this] court was correct in
its procedural ruling.

Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484, 120

S. Ct. 1595, 146 L. Ed. 2d 542 (2000).
A separate judgment will be entered in accordance with Rule
58 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
SO ORDERED this 11th day of May, 2020.

/s/Tom S. Lee_______________________
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2