Guthrie v. Director, TDCJ-CID, No. 3:2021cv01257 - Document 21 (N.D. Tex. 2022)

Court Description: Order Adopting Findings and Recommendations and Denying Certificate of Appealability. The Court ORDERS that Petitioner's petition for a writ of habeas corpus be DISMISSED with prejudice as untimely. (Ordered by Senior Judge Sam R Cummings on 9/12/2022) (ykp)

Download PDF
Guthrie v. Director, TDCJ-CID Doc. 21 Case 3:21-cv-01257-C-BN Document 21 Filed 09/12/22 Page 1 of 2 PageID 646 IN THE LINITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION JOSEPH VERL\N GUTHRIE. Petitioner, ) ) ) ) ) DIRECTOR, TDC.]-CID, Respondent. ) ) ) Civil Action No. 3:21-CV- 1257-C-BN ) ORDER Before the Court are the Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation ofthe United States Magistrate Judge therein advising the Court that Petitioner's petition for a writ ofhabeas corpus should be dismissed with prejudice as untimely.r The Court conducts a de novo review ofthose portions of the Magistrate Judge's repoft or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which a timely objection is made. 28 U.S.C. $ 636(bX1)(C). Portions ofthe report or proposed findings or recommendations that are not the subject of a timely objection will be accepted by the Court unless they are clearly erroneous or contrary to law. See United States v. ll/ilson, 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 conducted 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. Dockets.Justia.com Case 3:21-cv-01257-C-BN Document 21 Filed 09/12/22 Page 2 of 2 PageID 647 Court ORDERS that Petitioner's petition for a wdt of habeas corpus be DISMISSED with preiudice 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: claims debatable or wrong," or (2) "it (l) this Court's "assessment ofthe constitutional debatable whether the petition states a valid claim ofthe denial of a constitutional right" and "debatable whether [this Court] was correct in its procedural ruling." S/act v. McDaniel,529 U.S. 473,484 (2000). SO ORDERED. Dated seprembe, /L, zozz. R. OR 2 MINGS STATE I CT JUDGE

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.