Jackson v. USA, No. 3:2020cv01738 - Document 4 (N.D. Tex. 2020)
Court Description: Order Accepting 3 Findings and Recommendations and Denying Certificate of Appealability re: 2 Motion to Vacate under 28 U.S.C. 2255 filed by Michael Demon Jackson. (Ordered by Senior Judge Sidney A Fitzwater on 8/24/2020) (ndt)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Jackson v. USA Doc. 4 Case 3:20-cv-01738-D-BK Document 4 Filed 08/24/20 Page 1 of 2 PageID 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION MICHAEL DEMON JACKSON, Movant, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent. § § § § § § § Civil No. 3:20-CV-1738-D (Criminal No. 3:14-CR-238-D-1) ORDER The United States Magistrate Judge made findings, conclusions, and a recommendation in this case. No objections were filed. The undersigned district judge reviewed the proposed findings, conclusions, and recommendation for plain error. Finding none, the court adopts the findings, conclusions, and recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge. It is therefore ordered that movant’s motion to hold in abeyance or for a place holder is denied, and this 28 U.S.C. § 2255 case is summarily dismissed without prejudice for want of jurisdiction. Considering the record in this case and pursuant to Fed. R. App. P. 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). Dockets.Justia.com Case 3:20-cv-01738-D-BK Document 4 Filed 08/24/20 Page 2 of 2 PageID 10 If movant files a notice of appeal, ( ) movant may proceed in forma pauperis on appeal. (X) movant must pay the $505.00 appellate filing fee or submit a motion to proceed in forma pauperis. SO ORDERED. August 24, 2020. _________________________________ SIDNEY A. FITZWATER SENIOR JUDGE 2
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
