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

THOMAS C. SOSA, JR., § TDCJ No. 02374326, § § Petitioner, § § No. 3:22-cv-2078-K V. § § STATE OF TEXAS ET AL., § § Respondents. §

ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE AND DENYING A CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY

The United States Magistrate Judge made findings, conclusions, and a recommendation in this case. Objections were filed on February 4, 2025. The District Court reviewed de novo those portions of the proposed findings, conclusions, and recommendation to which objection was made, and reviewed the remaining proposed findings, conclusions, and recommendation for plain error. Finding no error, the Court ACCEPTS the Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge. Petitioner’s Objections are OVERRULED. Further, all of Petitioner’s outstanding motions are DENIED. Considering the record in this case and pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 22(b), Rule 11(a) of the Rules Governing §§ 2254 and 2255 proceedings, and

(c), the Court DENIES a certificate of appealability. The Court 1 adopts and incorporates by reference the Magistrate Judge’s Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation filed in this case in support of its finding that Petitioner has failed to show that reasonable jurists would find “it debatable whether the petition states a valid claim of the denial of a constitutional right” or “debatable whether [this Court] was correct in its procedural ruling.” Slack vp. McDaniel,

(2000). But, if Petitioner elects to file a notice of appeal, Petitioner must either pay the appellate filing fee or move for leave to appeal in forma pauperis. SO ORDERED. Signed February 11", 2025.

ED KINKEADE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE