Bearden v. Director, TDCJ-CID, No. 3:2020cv03018 - Document 7 (N.D. Tex. 2020)

Court Description: Order Adopting 5 Findings and Recommendations. The Court finds that Petitioner's objections should be OVERRULED. Petitioner's successive Petition under 28 U.S.C. $ 2254 shall be TRANSFERRED to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. (Ordered by Senior Judge Sam R Cummings on 10/26/2020) (jmg)

Download PDF
Bearden v. Director, TDCJ-CID Doc. 7 Case 3:20-cv-03018-C-BH Document 7 Filed 10/26/20 Page 1 of 2 PageID 38 IN THE TINITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION PAUI- EDWARD BEARDEN, ) ) Petitioner. ) ) ) ) DIRECTOR, TDCJ-CID, Respondent. ) ) ) Civil Action No. 3:20-CV-301 8-C-BH 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 of Habeas Corpus should be transferred to the United States Court ofAppeals for the Fifth Circuit as successlve. The Court conducts a de novo review ofthose portions ofthe Magistrate Judge's report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which a timely objection is made. 28 U.S.C. (i 636(b)(1)(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 Stotes v. Wilson,864F.2d 1219,1221 (5th Cir. 1989). After due consideration and having conducied a de novo review, the Court finds that Petitioner's objections should be OVERRULED. The Court has further conducted an independent review of the Magistrate Judge's findings and conclusions and finds no error. It is I Petitioner filed objections to the Magistrate Judge's Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation on October | 9, 2020. Dockets.Justia.com Case 3:20-cv-03018-C-BH Document 7 Filed 10/26/20 Page 2 of 2 PageID 39 therefore ORDERED that the Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation are hereby ADOPTED as the findings and conclusions of the Court. For the reasons stated therein, Petitioner's successive Petition under 28 U.S.C. $ 2254 shall be TRANSFERRED to the United States Court olAppeals for the Fifth Circuit pursuant to Henderson v. 1(aro,282F.3d862,864 (5th Cir. 2002), and In re Epps, 127 F .3d 364,365 (5th Cir. 1997),by separate judgment.2 ,T So ORDERED Us Jb"'aay of October.2020. ? GS R STA ISTRICI'JTJDGE I 2 A certificate ofappealability (COA) is not required to appeal an order transferring a successive habeas petition. See In re Garrett, 633 F. App'x 260, 261 (5th Cir. 2016\i United States v. Fuhon,780 F.3d 683 (5th Cir.20l5). 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.