Girma v. Davis

Filing 6

ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE: The court accepts the findings and conclusions of the magistrate judge and DISMISSES this action for lack of jurisdiction. Petitioner is DENIED a certificate of appealability. (Ordered by Senior Judge A. Joe Fish on 4/4/2017) (ash)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION ABEY BELETTE GIRMA, ID # 1911640, ) ) Petitioner, ) ) VS. ) ) LORIE DAVIS, Director, Texas ) Department of Criminal Justice, ) Correctional Institutions Division, ) ) Respondent. ) CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:17-CV-0710-G (BH) ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE After reviewing all relevant matters of record in this case, including the findings, conclusions, and recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge and any objections thereto, in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), the court is of the opinion that the findings and conclusions of the magistrate judge are correct and they are accepted as the findings and conclusions of the court. For the reasons stated in the findings, conclusions, and recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge, this action, based on the petitioner’s motion for an extension of time to file a federal habeas petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254, is DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction. In accordance with FED. R. APP. P. 22(b) and 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c) and after considering the record in this case and the recommendation of the magistrate judge, petitioner is DENIED a certificate of appealability. The court adopts and incorporates by reference the magistrate judge’s findings, conclusions and recommendation in support of its finding that the petitioner 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). If the petitioner files a notice of appeal, he must pay the $505.00 appellate filing fee or submit a motion to proceed in forma pauperis and a properly signed certificate of inmate trust account. SO ORDERED. April 4, 2017. ___________________________________ A. JOE FISH Senior 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?