Harper v. Director, TDCJ-CID

Filing 8

MEMORANDUM ORDER adopting 4 Report and Recommendation. Ordered that the writ of habeas corpus is dismissed with prejudice as barred by sanctions previously imposed upon Harper by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. Ordered that the Petitioner Darrell Harper is denied a certificate of appealability sua sponte. Ordered that any and all motions which may be pending in this action are hereby denied. Signed by Judge Ron Clark on 3/7/2017. (bjc, )

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION DARRELL J. HARPER #1957729 § v. § DIRECTOR, TDCJ-CID § CIVIL ACTION NO. 6:16cv952 MEMORANDUM ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE AND ENTERING FINAL JUDGMENT The Petitioner Darrell Harper, proceeding pro se, filed this application for the writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. §2254 complaining of the legality of his confinement. This Court ordered that the case be referred to the United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §636(b)(1) and (3) and the Amended Order for the Adoption of Local Rules for the Assignment of Duties to United States Magistrate Judges. After review of the pleadings, the Magistrate Judge issued a Report recommending that the petition be dismissed as barred by sanctions imposed upon Harper by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. Harper filed objections asserting that the Fifth Circuit’s sanctions violate his rights under the First Amendment, he has been subjected to discrimination and harassment based on race in the workplace, he was not allowed to present evidence that another person committed the crime, his right to be free from double jeopardy and self-incrimination have been violated, he was found guilty for conduct which was not a crime, he is being held in slavery and subjected to torture, and he has been subjected to “prejudicial errors of law” in violation of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Administrative Procedures Act, the Whistleblower Protection Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Federal Tort Claims Act, the Texas Tort Claims Act, and the Texas Commission on Human Rights Act. These objections are patently without merit. 1 The Court has conducted a careful de novo review of those portions of the Magistrate Judge’s proposed findings and recommendations to which the Petitioner objected. See 28 U.S.C. §636(b)(1) (District Judge shall “make a de novo determination of those portions of the Report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made.”) Upon such de novo review, the Court has determined that the Report of the Magistrate Judge is correct and the Petitioner’s objections are without merit. The court finds that Petitioner's Application and his objections were filed for an improper purpose, namely to harass, and impose costs on Defendant. There is no constitutional right of access to the courts to prosecute an action that is frivolous, malicious, or pursued for the sole purpose of harassing another. Villar v. Crowley Maritime Corp., 990 F.2d 1489, 1499 (5th Cir. 1993). It is accordingly ORDERED that the Petitioner’s objections are overruled and the Report of the Magistrate Judge (docket no. 4) is ADOPTED as the opinion of the District Court. It is further ORDERED that the above-styled application for the writ of habeas corpus is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE as barred by sanctions previously imposed upon Harper by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. It is further ORDERED that the Petitioner Darrell Harper is DENIED a certificate of appealability sua sponte. Finally, it is ORDERED that any and all motions which may be pending in this action are hereby DENIED. So ORDERED and SIGNED this 7 day of March, 2017. ___________________________________ Ron Clark, United States District Judge 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?