Your document has been successfully saved!

Search through millions of court cases, regulations, statutes and more...

Search for
Boolean Connector Use Result
AND Sleep AND Fall Records with both “Slip” and “Fall”
OR Lee OR Grant Records with either “Lee” or “Grant”
NOT Transaction NOT Fee Records that contain “Transaction” but exclude “Fee”
( ) (Tree OR Shrub) AND Fall Records containing “Tree” or “Shrub”, and the word “Fall”
" " "Capital Punishment" Records containing the exact phrase “Capital Punishment”
* Affirm* Records containing variations of the root word (such as “Affirmed”, “Affirming”, “Affirmation”, and etc…)
? Connect?r Records that contain single letter variations (such as “Connector” and “Connecter”)
Jurisdiction: Texas Northern District Court
Decision Date: 3/29/2012

STATES

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            FEDERAL

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        Padilla v. Watkins Padilla v. Watkins (N.D. Tex., 2012)

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        ISMAEL PADILLA, #356764, Plaintiff,
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        v.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        DISTRICT ATTORNEY CRAIG WATKINS, Defendants.

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        3: 11-CV-2232-M (BK)

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

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        Dated: March 29, 2012

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        ISMAEL PADILLA, #356764, Plaintiff, v. DISTRICT ATTORNEY CRAIG WATKINS, Defendants.

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        3: 11-CV-2232-M (BK)

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

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        Dated: March 29, 2012

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION OF
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                The United States Magistrate Judge made Findings, Conclusions and a Recommendation in this case. Plaintiff filed objections, and the District Court has made a de novo review of those portions of the proposed findings and recommendation to which objection was made. Plaintiff's objections are lengthy and difficult to decipher. He appears to request DNA attesting on the basis of a motion and a supplemental motion for DNA testing, which he submitted to the Dallas County District Court Clerk for filing in February and May 2011. It is unclear whether the Clerk received and filed the motions. Even if filed, the motions long preceded September 1, 2011, the effective date of the amendments to the DNA testing statute and, thus, cannot be deemed to have been filed under the 2011 amendments.

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                To satisfy standing, a plaintiff must establish that "he has suffered 'injury in fact, ' that the injury is 'fairly traceable' to the actions of the defendant, and that the injury will likely be

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        Page 2

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        redressed by a favorable decision. " Bennett v. Spear, 520 U.S. 154 162 (1997) (cited cases omitted). Because Plaintiff has not sought DNA testing in state court since September 2011, he cannot satisfy standing to sue under the 2011 amendments to the DNA testing statute, and the Court lacks jurisdiction over his claims. Plaintiff's other claims are barred by limitations. Accordingly, Plaintiff's objections are overruled, and the Court ACCEPTS the Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge.

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                The Court CERTIFIES that any appeal of this action would not be taken in good faith. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3). In support of this finding, the Court adopts and incorporates by reference the Order accepting the findings, conclusions and recommendation of the magistrate judge. See Baugh v. Taylor, 117 F. 3d 197, 202 n. 21 (5th Cir. 1997). Based on the above Order, the Court finds that any appeal of this action would present no legal point of arguable merit and would, therefore, be frivolous. Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215, 220 (5th Cir. 1983).

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                _________________        BARBARA M. G. LYNN        UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE        NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        --------

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        Notes:

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 Effective September 1, 2011, the Texas Legislature amended Article 64. 01(b) to provide for forensic DNA testing of "evidence containing biological material" that (1) "was not previously subjected to DNA testing; or (2) although previously subjected to DNA testing, can be subjected to testing with newer testing techniques that provide a reasonable likelihood of results that are more accurate and probative than the results of the previous test. "

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        --------

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        --------

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        Notes:

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 Effective September 1, 2011, the Texas Legislature amended Article 64. 01(b) to provide for forensic DNA testing of "evidence containing biological material" that (1) "was not previously subjected to DNA testing; or (2) although previously subjected to DNA testing, can be subjected to testing with newer testing techniques that provide a reasonable likelihood of results that are more accurate and probative than the results of the previous test. "

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        --------

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        Cited By
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        Cites
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215 (5th Cir., 1983)
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        Decision Date: 1983-06-16 Citations: 31
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        Negative Treatment
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        Notes

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        Please, select a date range