Roedel v. Kirkegard et al

Filing 6

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 3 in full. Petition for writ of habeas corpus 1 is DISMISSED. A certificate of appealability is DENIED. Signed by Judge Dana L. Christensen on 7/21/2016. Mailed to Roedel. (TAG, )

FILED
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF MONTANA
MISSOULA DIVISION

JUL 2 1 2016
Cle~. ~ S District Court
D1stnct Of Montana
Missoula

CV 16-66-M-DLC-JCL

LAWRENCE ROEDEL,
Petitioner,

ORDER
vs.
LEROY KIRKEGARD and
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE
STATE OF MONTANA,
Respondents.
United States Magistrate Judge Jeremiah C. Lynch entered findings and
recommendations in this matter on June 13, 2016, recommending dismissal of
Petitioner Lawrence Roedel's ("Roedel") petition for writ of habeas corpus,
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Roedel filed objections to the findings and
recommendations on June 22, 2016, and is therefore entitled to de novo review of
those findings and recommendations to which he specifically objects. 28 U.S.C.

§ 63 6(b )( 1)( C). This Court reviews for clear error those findings and
recommendations to which no party objects. See McDonnell Douglas Corp. v.

Commodore Bus. Mach., Inc., 656 F.2d 1309, 1313 (9th Cir. 1981); Thomas v.
Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985). "Clear error exists ifthe Court is left with a

-1-

definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed." United States v.

Syrax, 235 F.3d 422, 427 (9th Cir. 2000). However, [w]here a petitioner's
objections constitute perfunctory responses argued in an attempt to engage the
district court in a rehashing of the same arguments set forth in the original habeas
petition, the applicable portions of the findings and recommendations will be
reviewed for clear error." Rosling v. Kirkegard, 2014 WL 693315 at *3 (D. Mont.
Feb. 21, 2014) (citations omitted).
In his five-line objection, Roedel states that he objects to Judge Lynch's
findings and recommendations; that Judge Lynch "grossly" misrepresented the
facts of his case, and therefore abused his discretion and caused a violation of
Roedel' s constitutional rights; and that a certificate of appealability should be
granted. (Doc. 5.) Roedel's objections do not focus on any particular error on
Judge Lynch's part, but instead seek to engage the Court in a rehash of the
constitutional arguments contained within his petition. They do not call into
question Judge Lynch's conclusion that Roedel is barred from filing the instant
successive habeas petition absent leave from the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.
Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that Judge Lynch's findings and
recommendations (Doc. 3) are ADOPTED IN FULL. Roedel' s petition for writ of
habeas corpus (Doc. 1) is DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction.
-2-

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Court shall enter by separate
document a judgment of dismissal.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a certificate ofappealability is.DENIED.
DATED this

1..\ 17tday of July, 2016.

Dana L. Christensen, Chief Judge
United States District Court

-3-