Adams v. Lumpkin
MEMORANDUM ORDER ADOPTING 18 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS. Signed by District Judge Marcia A. Crone on 1/17/23. (ljw, )
Case 9:20-cv-00206-MAC-ZJH Document 21 Filed 01/17/23 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 112
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
CIVIL ACTION NO. 9:20-CV-206
MEMORANDUM ORDER ADOPTING THE
MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Glen Adams, proceeding pro se, filed this petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to
U.S.C. § 2254. The court previously referred this matter to the Honorable Zack Hawthorn,
United States Magistrate Judge, at Beaumont, Texas, for consideration pursuant to applicable laws
and orders of the court. The magistrate judge has submitted a Report and Recommendation of
United States Magistrate Judge recommending the petition be denied.
The court has received the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge,
along with the record, pleadings, and all available evidence. No objections were filed to the Report
Accordingly, the findings of fact and conclusions of law of the magistrate judge are correct
and the report of the magistrate judge is ADOPTED. A final judgment will be entered denying
In addition, the court is of the opinion petitioner is not entitled to a certificate of
appealability. An appeal from a final judgment denying habeas relief may not proceed unless a
certificate of appealability is issued. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253. The standard for a certificate of
appealability requires the petitioner to make a substantial showing of the denial of a federal
constitutional right. See Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 483-84 (2000); Elizalde v. Dretke, 362
F.3d 323, 328 (5th Cir. 2004). To make a substantial showing, the petitioner need not establish
Case 9:20-cv-00206-MAC-ZJH Document 21 Filed 01/17/23 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 113
that he would prevail on the merits. Rather, he must demonstrate that the issues raised in the
petition are subject to debate among jurists of reason, that a court could resolve the issues in a
different manner, or that the questions presented are worthy of encouragement to proceed further.
See Slack, 529 U.S. at 483-84. Any doubt regarding whether to grant a certificate of appealability
should be resolved in favor of the petitioner, and the severity of the penalty may be considered in
making this determination. See Miller v. Johnson, 200 F.3d 274, 280-81 (5th Cir. 2000).
In this case, the petitioner has not shown that the issue of whether his petition is meritorius
is subject to debate among jurists of reason. The factual and legal questions raised by petitioner
have been consistently resolved adversely to his position and the questions presented are not
worthy of encouragement to proceed further. As a result, a certificate of appealability shall not
issue in this matter.
SIGNED at Beaumont, Texas, this 17th day of January, 2023.
MARCIA A. CRONE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
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?