Chaparosa v. Obama et al

Filing 8

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 6 in full. Chaparosa's Petition is DISMISSED, and a certificate of appealability is DENIED. Signed by Judge Donald W. Molloy on 9/7/2011. Mailed to Chaparosa. (TAG, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRlCT COURT

FOR THE DISTRlCT OF MONTANA

MISSOULA DIVISION

)

DARRELL W. CHAPAROSA

CV 11-89-M-DWM-JCL

)
)

Petitioner,

v.

)

ORDER

)
)

1871 UNITED STATES
COMMANDER IN CHIEF
BARACK OBAMA,

)
)
)

Respondent.

)

---------------------)
On June 22, 2011, Petitioner Darrell Chaparosa, proceeding pro se, filed a
petition titled "Common Law Petition for a Common Law Writ of Habeas Corpus
ad Subjiciendum, Mandamus, and Declaratory Judgment." (Dkt # 1). He also
moved to proceed informa pauperis. The matter was referred to Magistrate Judge
Lynch under 28 U.S.c. § 636(b). While Chaparosa's initial petition was entirely
incomprehensible, Judge Lynch gave Chaparosa the opportunity to amend his

1

petition in order to clarifY his allegations. (Dkt # 4). Judge Lynch also instructed
Chaparosa to use the standard petition fOnTIs. Id. Chaparosa responded by
submitting a similarly unintelligible petition, refusing to use the standard forms.
(Dk1:. # 5). Judge Lynch granted Chaparosas motion to proceed informa pauperis
and issued his Findings and Recommendation on August 9,2011. He
recommended that Chaparosa's petition be dismissed and a certificate of
appealability be denied.
Chaparosa timely objected to Judge Lynch's Findings and Recommendation
on August 29, 2011. (Dkt # 7). He is therefore entitled to de novo review of the
specified findings or recommendations to which he objects. 28 U.S.C. §
636(b)(I). The portions of the Findings and Recommendation not specifically
objected to will be reviewed for clear error. McDonnell Douglas Corp. v.
Commodore Bus. Mach.. Inc., 656 F.2d 1309, 1313 (9th Cir. 1981).
Despite Chaparosa's objections, the Court agrees with Judge Lynch's
analysis and conclusions. As with his previous two petitions, Chaparosa's
objections are entirely incomprehensible. He has made no showing-in either his
petitions or his objections-that he is eligible for a writ of habeas corpus or that he
has been deprived of a constitutional right. 28 U.S.C. §§ 2253(c)(2), 2254-2255.
In accordance with the foregoing,
2

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Findings and Recommendation (dkt #
6) is adopted in full;
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Chaparosa's petition is DISMISSED.
The Clerk of Court is directed to enter by separate document a judgment of
dismissal.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a certificate of appealability is DENIED.
Dated this

_~ay of September, 2011.

Donald W;M lIoy, District Judge
United ~ates istrict Court
//1
!

3