Driggers v. Cruz et al

Filing 18

ORDER ADOPTING 15 FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE; Denies with Prejudice 2 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, filed by Paul William Driggers. The court certifies that any appeal of this action would not be taken in good faith. (Ordered by Chief Judge Sidney A Fitzwater on 6/29/2012) (cea)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
DALLAS DIVISION
PAUL WILLIAM DRIGGERS, #00922-287, §
Petitioner,
§
§
v.
§
§
MAUREEN CRUZ, Warden,
§
Respondent.
§

3:11-CV-2310-D

ORDER
After making an independent review of the pleadings, files, and records in this case, and the
findings, conclusions, and recommendation of the magistrate judge, the court concludes that the
findings and conclusions are correct. It is therefore ordered that the findings, conclusions, and
recommendation of the magistrate judge are adopted.
Because petitioner filed his petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2241, he is not required to obtain a
certificate of appealability to proceed on appeal. Padilla v. United States, 416 F.3d 424, 425 (5th
Cir. 2005) (per curiam). The court certifies that any appeal of this action would not be taken in good
faith. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3). In support of this finding, the court adopts and incorporates by
reference the magistrate judge’s findings, conclusions, and recommendation. See Baugh v. Taylor,
117 F.3d 197, 202 n.21 (5th Cir. 1997). Based on the findings and recommendation, the court
concludes that any appeal of this action would present no legal point of arguable merit and would

therefore be frivolous. See Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215, 220 (5th Cir. 1983).
SO ORDERED.
June 29, 2012.

_________________________________
SIDNEY A. FITZWATER
CHIEF JUDGE

-2-