Federico Verduzco-Vega v. United States of America

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS AMARILLO DIVISION FEDERICO VERDUZCO-VEGA, Petitioner, v. 2:24-CV-084-Z-BR UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent. ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATION AND DENYING MOTION TO VACATE Before the Court are the Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation (“FCR”) of the United States Magistrate Judge to deny the motion to vacate sentence under 28 U.S.C. Section 2255 filed by the petitioner. No objections to the FCR have been filed. After making an independent review of the pleadings, files, and records in this case, the District Judge concludes that the FCR of the Magistrate Judge is correct. It is therefore ORDERED that the FCR of the Magistrate Judge (ECF No. 25) is ADOPTED, and the motion to vacate pursuant to Section 2255 is DENIED. Considering the record in this case—and pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 22(b), Rule 11(a) of the Rules Governing Section 2255 Cases in the United States District Courts, and 28 U.S.C. Section 2253(c)—the Court denies a certificate of appealability because Petitioner has failed to make “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); see also Hernandez v. Thaler, 630 F.3d 420, 424 (5th Cir. 2011). The Court ADOPTS and incorporates by reference the Magistrate Judge’s FCR filed in this case in support of its finding that Petitioner has failed to show that (1) reasonable jurists would find this Court’s “assessment of the constitutional claims debatable or wrong,” or (2) 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, 529 U.S. at 484. SO ORDERED. October 3), 2025 MATTHEW J. KACSMARYK TED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE