Marrs v. United States

District Court, N.D. Texas

Marrs v. United States

Trial Court Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION

AARON DEWAYNE MARRS, ) ID # 56487-177, ) Movant, ) ) No. 3:20-CV-3418-D vs. ) No. 3:17-CR-573-D(14) ) UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) Respondent. ) ORDER

After reviewing all relevant matters of record in this case, including the findings, conclu- sions, and recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge, in accordance with

28 U.S.C. § 636

(b)(1), the court is of the opinion that the findings and conclusions of the magistrate judge are correct and they are adopted as the findings and conclusions of the court. For the reasons stated in the findings, conclusions, and recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge, the Motion Under

28 U.S.C. § 2255

to Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct Sentence by a Person in Federal Custody, filed on November 13, 2020, is denied with prejudice. In accordance with Fed. R. App. P. 22(b) and

28 U.S.C. § 2253

(c) and after considering the record in this case and the recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, the movant is denied a certificate of appealability. The court adopts and incorporates by reference the magistrate judge’s findings, conclusions, and recommendation in support of its finding that the movant 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 v. McDaniel,

529 U.S. 473, 484

(2000). If movant files a notice of appeal, he must pay the $505.00 appellate filing fee or submit a motion to proceed in forma pauperis that is accompanied by a properly signed certificate of inmate trust account. SO ORDERED. August 17, 2023.

SIDNEY A. FITZWATER SENIOR JUDGE

Reference

Status
Unknown