Jones v. Director, TDCJ-CID

Filing 25

Order Adopting 20 Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge and Denying Certificate of Appealability re: 3 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus. (Ordered by Senior Judge Sam R Cummings on 8/1/2022) (ykp)

Case 3:20-cv-03516-C-BN Document 25 Filed 08/01/22

Page 1 of 2 PageID 2403

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTzuCT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
DALLAS DIVISION
CHzuSTOPHER DALE JONES.
Petitioner.

)
)
)
)
)
)

DIRECTOR, TDCJ-CID,
Respondent

)
)
)

Civil Action No. 3 :20-CV-35 1 6-C-BN

ORDER
Before the Court are the Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation of the United
States Magistrate Judge therein advising the Court that Petitioner's petition for a writ ofhabeas

corpus should be dismissed with prejudice as untimely.l
The Court conducts a de novo review ofthose portions of the Magistrate Judge's report or
specified proposed findings or recommendations to which a timely objection is made. 28 U.S.C.
$

636(bxlXC). Portions of the report or proposed findings or recommendations that are not the

subj ect

of

a

timely objection will be accepted by the Court unless they are clearly erroneous or

contraryto law. See [lnited States v. llilson,864 F.2d 1219,1221 (5th Cir. 1989).
After due consideration and having conducted

a de novo

review, the Court finds that

Petitioner's objections should be OVERRULED. The Court has further conducled an
independent review ofthe Magistrate Judge's findings and conclusions and finds no error. It is
therefore ORDERED that the Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation are hereby

ADOPTED

as the

findings and conclusions of the Court. For the reasons stated therein, the

I Petitioner has filed objections to the Magistrate Judge's Findings, Conclusions, and
Recommendation.

Case 3:20-cv-03516-C-BN Document 25 Filed 08/01/22

Page 2 of 2 PageID 2404

Court ORDERS tha! Petitioner's petition for a writ of habeas corpus be DISMISSED with
prejudice as untimely.
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 is DENIED. Specifically, Petitioner has failed

to show that a reasonable jurist would find:

(l)

this Court's "assessment ofthe constitutional

claims debatable or wrong," or (2) "it debatable whether the petition states a valid claim ofthe
denial ofa constitutional right" and "debatable whether [this Court] was correct in its procedural

ruling;' Slackv. McDaniel,529 U.S. 473,484 (2000)
SO ORDERED.

Dated

August

/

,2022.

C

OR

2

GS

STATES

IS

CT JUDGE