Turner v. Davis-Director TDCJ-CID

Filing 15

Order Accepting 12 Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge. The Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE as barred by the statute of limitations. This Court finds that a certificate of appealability should be denied. (Ordered by Senior Judge Sam R Cummings on 10/24/2018) (zkc)

IN THE UNITED ST ATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
DALLAS DIVISION

KENNETH RAY TURNER,
ID #01887207,
Petitioner,
vs.

)
)
)
)
)

LORIE DAVIS, Director Texas Department
Criminal Justice Correctional Institutional
Division,
Respondent.

)
)
)
)

No. 3:18-CV-0331-C-BK

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 Petitioner' s objections thereto
(filed August 7, 2018), in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l), the undersigned Senior District
Judge 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. 1
For the reasons stated in the Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation of the United
States Magistrate Judge, by separate judgment, the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus is
DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE as barred by the statute of limitations.
Pursuant to Rule 22 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure and 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c),
this Court finds that a certificate of appealability should be denied. Petitioner has failed to show that
reasonable jurists would find (1) this Court' s "assessment of the constitutional claims debatable or
wrong," or (2) "it debatable whether the petition states a valid claim of the denial of a constitutional
'The document indicates that the objections were mailed on August 1, 2018, and deemed
timely filed on that date. The Court finds that Petitioner' s objections should be OVERRULED.

right" and "debatable whether [this Court] was correct in its procedural ruling." Slack v. McDaniel,
529 U.S. 473 , 484 (2000).

SIGNED this

/

-2.i_ day of October, 2018.