Jones v. Cockrell

Full title: MICHAEL WAYNE JONES, Petitioner, v. JANIE COCKRELL, DIRECTOR, T.D.C.J.…

Court: United States District Court, N.D. Texas, Fort Worth Division

Date published: Nov 27, 2002

CIVIL ACTION NO. 4:02-CV-584-Y (N.D. Tex. Nov. 27, 2002)

Opinion

CIVIL ACTION NO. 4:02-CV-584-Y

November 27, 2002

ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION (With Special Instructions to Clerk of the Court)

TERRY R. MEANS, United States District Judge.

The Court has made an independent review of the following matters in the above-styled and numbered cause:

1. The pleadings and record;

2. The proposed findings, conclusions, and recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge filed on November 5, 2002.

3 The Petitioner's written objections to the proposed findings, conclusions and recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge filed on November 21, 2002.¹

1 Along with the written objections, Jones separately filed a document labeled as a "notice of appeal," which has been construed and docketed as an appeal of the magistrate judge's report to this United States District Judge.

The Court, after de novo review, finds and determines that Petitioner's objections must be overruled, and that the petition for writ of habeas corpus should be denied for the reasons stated in the magistrate judge's findings and conclusions.²

2 Jones has also filed a motion for discovery seeking to obtain discovery of alleged records of the Tarrant county jail in aid of his claim that counsel was ineffective. To be entitled to discovery, a habeas petitioner must show that there is a factual dispute that, if resolved in his favor, would entitle him to relief and that the State did not afford him a full and fair evidentiary hearing. Rector v. Johnson, 120 F.3d 551, 562-63 (5th Cir. 1997), cert. denied, 522 U.S. 1120 (1998); RULES GOVERNING SECTION 2254 CASES TN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTS 6(a). Jones has failed to show that he is entitled to relief or that he was not afforded a full and fair hearing in the state habeas court. The motion for discovery should be denied.

It is therefore ORDERED that the findings, conclusions, and recommendation of the magistrate judge should be, and are hereby, ADOPTED.

It is further ORDERED that Petitioner's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus be, and is hereby, DENIED.

It is further ORDERED that Petitioner's motion for discovery [docket no. 18] be, and is hereby, DENIED.

It is further ORDERED that the clerk of the Court shall transmit a copy of this order to Petitioner by certified mail, return receipt requested.