U.S. DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FILED FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS NOV 16 2001 AMARILLO DIVISION CLERK, U.S. DISTRICT COURT JAY ANTHONY NOTTINGHAM, § By = Petitioner, § § v. § 2:19-CV-95-Z-BQ § BOBBY LUMPKIN § Director, Texas Department of § Criminal Justice, § Correctional Institutions Division, § § Respondent. § ORDER ADOPTING RECOMMENDATION and DISMISSING PETITION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS After making an independent review of the pleadings, files, and records in this case, as well

as the findings, conclusions, and recommendation (“FCR”) of the United States Magistrate Judge (ECF No. 35), the Court FINDS that the Magistrate Judge’s findings and conclusions are correct. The Court therefore ORDERS that the recommendation of the Magistrate Judge should be and is hereby ADOPTED, and the petition for a writ of habeas corpus is dismissed WITH PREJUDICE

as moot. Considering the record in this case and pursuant to Fed. R. App. P. 22(b), Rule 11(a) of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases in the United States District Courts, and 28 U.S.C.§ 2253(c), the Court DENIES a certificate of appealability. The Court ADOPTS and INCORPORATES by reference the Magistrate Judge’s FCR filed in this case in support of its finding that the Petitioner has failed to show that reasonable jurists would (1) find this Court’s “assessment of the constitutional claims debatable or wrong,” or (2) “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 v. McDaniel,

(2000). If petitioner files a notice of appeal, () _ petitioner may proceed in forma pauperis on appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 24(a)(3). (X) petitioner must pay the $505.00 appellate filing fee or submit a motion to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal. SO ORDERED. November 2021. m3 HEW J. fear UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE