PUR a IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT ee □□□□□ | FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS _ Nesom AMARILLO DIVISION | aN -6 202 | JOHN KEITH LUSK, § Sa RE | Petitioner, :

V. 2:19-CV-204-Z-BR DIRECTOR, TDCJ-CID, : Respondent. : ORDER On December 6, 2021 the United States Magistrate Judge entered a findings, conclusions, and recommendation (“FCR”) to dismiss the Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus filed by John Keith Lusk (“Petitioner”) (ECF No. 26). Petitioner filed objections to the FCR (ECF No. 27). After making an independent review of the pleadings, files, and records in this case, as well as Petitioner’s objections, the Court ORDERS that Petitioner’s objections are OVERRULED and the FCR of the Magistrate Judge is ADOPTED. The Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus is dismissed WITH PREJUDICE as time barred. Considering the record in this case and pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 22(b), Rule 11(a) of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases in the United States District Courts, and

(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,

(2000); see also Hernandez v. Thaler,

(Sth 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 (1) that reasonable jurists would find this Court’s “assessment of the constitutional claims debatable or wrong,” or (2)

that 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,

. If Petitioner files a notice of appeal, he must pay the $505.00 appellate filing fee or submit a motion to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal. SO ORDERED. January Z. 2022.

UNJIED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE