From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Shipp v. United States

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS BEAUMONT DIVISION
Oct 10, 2017
CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:17-CV-275 (E.D. Tex. Oct. 10, 2017)

Opinion

CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:17-CV-275

10-10-2017

VAUDA VIRGLE SHIPP, JR. v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ET AL.


MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

Petitioner Vauda Virgle Shipp, Jr., an inmate proceeding pro se, filed this petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. On June 29, 2017, the magistrate judge recommended dismissing the petition. Petitioner subsequently moved for recusal of the magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 455.

Title 28 U.S.C. § 455 requires a federal judge to disqualify himself in any proceeding in which his impartiality might reasonably be questioned. 28 U.S.C. § 455(a). Disqualification is appropriate if a reasonable person, with knowledge of all the circumstances, would question the court's impartiality. United States v. Anderson, 160 F.3d 231, 233 (5th Cir. 1998). In this instance, petitioner has utterly failed to set forth any facts which would cause an objective observer to question the court's impartiality. Petitioner contends that he previously sued the magistrate judge in cause number 1:16-CV-71 and 1:16-CV-154, and, thus, the magistrate judge should be disqualified from this case. In fact, the magistrate judge was not identified as a party to either case, although both cases were referred to the undersigned magistrate judge for consideration pursuant to applicable laws and orders of this court.

It appears that petitioner seeks disqualification of the magistrate judge because he was dissatisfied with rulings in the earlier cases. However, absent surrounding comments or accompanying opinion, judicial rulings alone will rarely constitute a valid basis for a motion to recuse or disqualify. Liteky v. United States, 510 U.S. 540, 555 (1994); Andrade v. Chojnacki, 338 F.3d 448, 455 (5th Cir. 2003). An objective observer would not question the court's impartiality based on the rulings in the earlier cases. Therefore, the motion to disqualify shall be denied.

It is accordingly

ORDERED that petitioner's motion for recusal of the magistrate judge (document no. 3) is DENIED.

SIGNED this the 10th day of October, 2017.

/s/_________

KEITH F. GIBLIN

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE


Summaries of

Shipp v. United States

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS BEAUMONT DIVISION
Oct 10, 2017
CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:17-CV-275 (E.D. Tex. Oct. 10, 2017)
Case details for

Shipp v. United States

Case Details

Full title:VAUDA VIRGLE SHIPP, JR. v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ET AL.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS BEAUMONT DIVISION

Date published: Oct 10, 2017

Citations

CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:17-CV-275 (E.D. Tex. Oct. 10, 2017)