Jackson v. Stephens Director TDCJ-CID, No. 4:2014cv00713 - Document 15 (N.D. Tex. 2016)

Court Description: Opinion and Order: For the reasons discussed herein, the petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 is DISMISSED as moot. Further, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c), for the reasons discussed herein, a certificate of appealability is DENIED. (Ordered by Judge Reed C O'Connor on 3/10/2016) (trt)

Download PDF
Jackson v. Stephens Director TDCJ-CID Doc. 15 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH DIVISION RICKEY DWIGHT JACKSON, Petitioner, v. WILLIAM STEPHENS, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division, Respondent. § § § § § § § § § Civil Action No. 4:14-CV-713-O OPINION AND ORDER Before the Court is a petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 filed by Petitioner, Rickey Dwight Jackson, a state prisoner who was confined in the Bridgeport Unit of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division (TDCJ), in Bridgeport, Texas, when the petition was filed, against William Stephens, director of TDCJ, Respondent. After considering the pleadings and relief sought by Petitioner, the Court has concluded that the petition should be dismissed as moot. I. BACKGROUND By this action, Petitioner sought release to mandatory supervision. Pet. 7, ECF No. 1. The TDCJ website and telephonic communication with the Bridgeport Unit confirms that Petitioner was released and is no longer confined. As of this date, Petitioner has not notified the clerk of Court of his current address or whereabouts. II. DISCUSSION Petitioner’s release has rendered his habeas petition moot. Bailey v. Southerland, 821 F.2d 277, 278-79 (5th Cir. 1987). Because this Court can no longer provide him with the relief he seeks, dismissal of the petition is appropriate. McRae v. Hogan, 576 F.2d 615, 616-17 (5th Cir. 1978). Dockets.Justia.com III. CONCLUSION For the reasons discussed herein, the petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 is DISMISSED as moot. Further, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c), for the reasons discussed herein, a certificate of appealability is DENIED. SO ORDERED on this 10th day of March, 2016. _____________________________________ Reed O’Connor UNITED STATES DISTRICT 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.