Norman v. USA
Filing
39
Order Accepting 29 Findings and Recommendations and Denying Certificate of Appealability. (Ordered by Judge Jane J. Boyle on 6/12/2018) (axm) Modified filed date on 6/12/2018 (axm).
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
DALLAS DIVISION
ALEXIS C. NORMAN, #49210-177,
Movant,
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Respondent.
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
3:17-CV-467-B-BK
3:15-CR-66-B (1)
ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION
OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE, AND
DENYING CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY
The United States Magistrate Judge made findings, conclusions and a recommendation in this
case. Movant filed objections, and the Court has made a de novo review of those portions of the
proposed findings and recommendation to which she objected. The objections are overruled, and the
Court ACCEPTS the Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate
Judge.
Considering the record in this case and pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure
22(b), Rule 11(a) of the Rules Governing §§ 2254 and 2255 proceedings, and 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c),
the Court DENIES a certificate of appealability. The Court adopts and incorporates by reference the
Magistrate Judge’s Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation filed in this case in support of its
finding that the movant has failed to show (1) that reasonable jurists would find this Court’s
“assessment of the constitutional claims debatable or wrong,” or (2) that reasonable jurists would find
“it debatable whether the petition states a valid claim of the denial of a constitutional right” and
“debatable whether [this Court] was correct in its procedural ruling.” Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S.
473, 484 (2000).1
In the event Movant will file a notice of appeal, the court notes that she must pay the $505.00
appellate filing fee or submit a motion to proceed in forma pauperis.
SO ORDERED this 11th day of June, 2018.
_________________________________
JANE J. BOYLE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
1
Rule 11 of the Rules Governing §§ 2254 and 2255 Cases, as amended effective on
December 1, 2009, reads as follows:
(a) Certificate of Appealability. The district court must issue or deny a certificate of
appealability when it enters a final order adverse to the applicant. Before entering the
final order, the court may direct the parties to submit arguments on whether a certificate
should issue. If the court issues a certificate, the court must state the specific issue or
issues that satisfy the showing required by 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2). If the court denies a
certificate, the parties may not appeal the denial but may seek a certificate from the court
of appeals under Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 22. A motion to reconsider a denial
does not extend the time to appeal.
(b) Time to Appeal. Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 4(a) governs the time to
appeal an order entered under these rules. A timely notice of appeal must be filed even if
the district court issues a certificate of appealability.
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?