McDonald v. Smith

N.D. Texas

McDonald v. Smith

DecidedApril 24, 2023

Docket3:23-cv-00415

StatusUnknown

This text of McDonald v. Smith (McDonald v. Smith) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, N.D. Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

McDonald v. Smith, (N.D. Tex. 2023).

Pincite

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION ALAN LYNN MCDONALD, #1039962, ) Petitioner, ) ) VS. ) No. 3:23-CV-415-M (BH) ) WARDEN SMITH, ) James V. Allred Unit, ) Respondent. ) ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE After reviewing the Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge and conducting a de novo review of those parts of the Findings and Conclusions to which objections have been made, I am of the opinion that the Findings and Conclusions of the Magistrate Judge are correct and they are accepted as the Findings and Conclusions of the Court. By separate judgment, the Amended Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus by a Person in State Custody, received on March 21, 2023 (doc. 5), will be TRANSFERRED to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit as a successive 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition pursuant to Henderson v. Haro, 282 F.3d 862, 864 (Sth Cir. 2002), and Jn re Epps, 127 F.3d 364, 365 (5th Cir. 1997).! SIGNED this 24th day of April, 2023.

[Ye VG Lepr fans BARA M. G. KYNN PNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

! A certificate of appealability (COA) is not required to appeal an order transferring a successive habeas petition. See In re Garrett, 633 F. App’x 260, 261 (Sth Cir. 2016); United States v. Fulton, 780 F.3d 683, 688 (5th Cir. 2015).

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION ALAN LYNN MCDONALD, #1039962, ) Petitioner, ) ) VS. ) No. 3:23-CV-415-M (BH) ) WARDEN SMITH, ) James V. Allred Unit, ) Respondent. ) ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE After reviewing the Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge and conducting a de novo review of those parts of the Findings and Conclusions to which objections have been made, I am of the opinion that the Findings and Conclusions of the Magistrate Judge are correct and they are accepted as the Findings and Conclusions of the Court. By separate judgment, the Amended Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus by a Person in State Custody, received on March 21, 2023 (doc. 5), will be TRANSFERRED to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit as a successive 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition pursuant to Henderson v. Haro, 282 F.3d 862, 864 (Sth Cir. 2002), and Jn re Epps, 127 F.3d 364, 365 (5th Cir. 1997).! SIGNED this 24th day of April, 2023.

[Ye VG Lepr fans BARA M. G. KYNN PNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

! A certificate of appealability (COA) is not required to appeal an order transferring a successive habeas petition. See In re Garrett, 633 F. App’x 260, 261 (Sth Cir. 2016); United States v. Fulton, 780 F.3d 683, 688 (5th Cir. 2015).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

McDonald v. Smith, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mcdonald-v-smith-txnd-2023.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack