Sadler v. Secretary, Department of Corrections

District Court, D. Montana

Sadler v. Secretary, Department of Corrections

Trial Court Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MONTANA HELENA DIVISION

TIMOTHY RAY SADLER, CV 21-09-H-BMM-KLD Petitioner,

vs. ORDER

SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, et. al.,

Respondents. United States Magistrate Judge Kathleen L. DeSoto entered her Findings and Recommendations in this case on March 25, 2021 (Doc. 43). Judge DeSoto recommended that Defendants’ complaint (Doc. 1) should be DISMISSED for without prejudice as unexhausted, that the Clerk of Court should be directed to enter judgment of dismissal, and a certificate of appealability should be DENIED. Defendant filed objections on April 8, 2021. (Doc. 44). The Court reviews de novo those Findings and Recommendations to which a party timely objected.

28 U.S.C. § 636

(b)(1). The Court reviews for clear error the portions of the Findings and Recommendations to which the party did not specifically object. McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Commodore Bus. Mach., Inc.,

656 F.2d 1309, 1313

(9th Cir. 1981). Where a party’s objections constitute perfunctory responses argued in an attempt to engage the district court in a reargument of the same arguments set forth in the original response, however, the Court will review the applicable portions of the findings and recommendations for

clear error. Rosling v. Kirkegard,

2014 WL 693315

*3 (D. Mont. Feb. 21, 2014) (internal citations omitted). Defendant’s objections advance the same arguments that he raised before. The Court will not engage in Defendant’s attempt to reargue the same issues. The

Court reviewed Judge DeSoto’s Findings and Recommendations for clear error. The Court finds no error. Before Sadler can proceed with a federal habeas petition, he must give the state courts one full opportunity to review his constitutional

claims. IT IS ORDERED that Judge DeSoto’s Findings and Recommendations (Doc. 3) are ADOPTED IN FULL.

1. Defendant Sadler’s Petition (Doc. 1) is DISMISSED without prejudice as unexhausted; 2. The Clerk of Court is directed to enter judgment of dismissal; and

3. The Clerk of Court is directed to have the docket reflect that the Court certifies pursuant to Rule 24(a)(3)(A) of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure that any appeal of this decision would not be taken in good faith. DATED this 14th day of April, 2021.

rd ; Aryr,~> ‘ VAC Gyr / VL (1 Brian Morris, Chief District Judge United States District Court

_3-

Reference

Status
Unknown