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)

Download PDF
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

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?