Opinion

Brown v. Davis

Court
District Court, E.D. Texas
Filed
Feb 27, 2024
Cited by
0 cases
Authority
More cited than 29.8%

The opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

BAKARI ABDUL BROWN, §

§

Petitioner, §

§

versus § CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:20-CV-512

§

DIRECTOR, TDCJ-CID, §

§

Respondent. §

MEMORANDUM ORDER OVERRULING PETITIONER’S OBJECTIONS AND

ADOPTING THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

Petitioner, Bakari Abdul Borwn, an inmate currently confined at the Estelle Unit with the

Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institution Division, proceeding pro se, filed

this petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The court referred this

matter to the Honorable Christine Stetson, United States Magistrate Judge, at Beaumont, Texas,

for consideration pursuant to applicable laws and orders of this court. The magistrate judge

recommends denying and dismissing the petition (#23).

The court has received and considered the Report and Recommendation of United States

Magistrate Judge, along with the record, pleadings and all available evidence. Petitioner filed

objections to the magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation (#26).

The court has conducted a de novo review of the objections in relations to the pleadings

and the applicable law. See FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b). After careful consideration, the court

concludes petitioner’s objections are without merit.

Petitioner has failed to rebut the presumption of correctness afforded to the factual findings

of the state court by clear and convincing evidence. Further, Petitioner has failed to show either

the state court adjudication was contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly

established federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States or that the state

court adjudication resulted in a decision that was based on an unreasonable determination of the

facts in light of the evidence presented in the state court proceeding. Therefore, the petition

should be denied and dismissed.

ORDER

Accordingly, Petitioner’s objections are OVERRULED. The findings of fact and

conclusions of law of the magistrate judge are correct, and the report of the magistrate judge is

ADOPTED. A final judgment will be entered in this case in accordance with the magistrate

judge’s recommendation.

Furthermore, Petitioner is not entitled to the issuance of a certificate of appealability. An

appeal from a judgment denying federal habeas corpus relief may not proceed unless a judge issues

a certificate of appealability. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253; FED. R. APP. P. 22(b). The standard for

granting a certificate of appealability, like that for granting a certificate of probable cause to appeal

under prior law, requires Petitioner to make a substantial showing of the denial of a federal

constitutional right. See Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 483-84 (2000); Elizalde v. Dretke, 362

F.3d 323, 328 (5th Cir. 2004); see also Barefoot v. Estelle, 463 U.S. 880, 893 (1982). In making

that substantial showing, Petitioner need not establish that he should prevail on the merits. Rather,

he must demonstrate that the issues are subject to debate among jurists of reason, that a court

could resolve the issues in a different manner, or that the questions presented are worthy of

encouragement to proceed further. See Slack, 529 U.S. at 483-84. Any doubt regarding whether

to grant a certificate of appealability is resolved in favor of Petitioner, and the severity of the

2

penalty may be considered in making this determination. See Miller v. Johnson, 200 F.3d 274,

280-81 (Sth Cir.), cert. denied, 531 U.S. 849 (2000).

Here, Petitioner has not shown that any of the issues raised by his claims are subject to

debate among jurists of reason. The factual and legal questions advanced by Petitioner are not

novel and have been consistently resolved adversely to his position. In addition, the questions

presented are not worthy of encouragement to proceed further. Thus, Petitioner has failed to make

a sufficient showing to merit the issuance of a certificate of appealability. Therefore, a certificate

of appealability shall not be issued.

SIGNED at Beaumont, Texas, this 27th day of February, 2024.

MARCIA A. CRONE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.