Kane v. Commissioner of Mental Health

Filing 14

OPINION AND ORDER Adopting 11 , 13 Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendations denying 1 , 4 Petitioner's motions for immediate release and to amend her initial petition for writ of habeas corpus, and granting Respondent's 12 Motion to dismiss. The court hereby DENIES and DISMISSES 1 Petitioner's petition for writ of habeas corpus. Petitioner's 6 motion for release from unlawful confinement is DENIED AS MOOT. Signed by Judge Christina Reiss on 1/22/2018. (pac)

U.S. OlSTHICT COURT

DISTRICT Of VERMONT
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE
DISTRICT OF VERMONT
PATRICIA KANE,
Petitioner,
v.
COMMISSIONER OF THE
DEPARTMENT OF MENTAL HEALTH,
Respondent.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

FILED

2018 JAN 22 AH II: 26
CLERK
BY

~

DEPUTY CLERK

Case No. 2:l 7-cv-157

OPINION AND ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S
REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
(Docs. 1, 4, 6, 11, 12, & 13)

This matter came before the court for a review of the Magistrate Judge's October
10, 2017 and December 14, 2017 Reports and Recommendations (the "R & R's").
(Docs. 11 & 13.) On August 16, 2017, self-represented Petitioner Patricia Kane filed a
petition for writ of habeas corpus, challenging an order of hospitalization pursuant to 18
V. S .A. § 7 617 (b )( 1) which placed her into the custody of Respondent Commissioner of
the Department of Mental Health and required her mandatory confinement and
medication at the Brattleboro Retreat. (Doc. 1.) On September 13, 2017, Petitioner filed
a motion to amend her initial petition and a motion for a preliminary injunction ordering
her release from custody. (Doc. 4.) Nine days later, on September 22, 2017, Petitioner
filed a motion for release from unlawful confinement. (Doc. 6.) In the October 10, 2017
R & R, the Magistrate Judge recommended that the court deny Petitioner's motion to
amend as well as her motion for a preliminary injunction. (Doc. 11.)
On November 3, 2017, Respondent filed a motion to dismiss the initial habeas
petition for lack of jurisdiction and failure to state a claim pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P.
12(b)(l) and (6). (Doc. 12.) On December 14, 2017, the Magistrate Judge issued a
second R & R, recommending that Respondent's motion to dismiss be granted, that

Petitioner's petition for writ of habeas corpus be denied, and that Petitioner's motion for
release from unlawful confinement be denied as moot. (Doc. 13.) Neither party filed
objections to either R & R, and the time to do so has expired.
A district judge must make a de nova determination of those portions of a
magistrate judge's report and recommendation to which an objection is made. Fed. R.
Civ. P. 72(b); 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l); Cullen v. United States, 194 F.3d 401,405 (2d Cir.
1999). The district judge may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings
or recommendations made by the magistrate judge. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l); accord

Cullen, 194 F .3d at 405. A district judge, however, is not required to review the factual
or legal conclusions of the magistrate judge as to those portions of a report and
recommendation to which no objections are addressed. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140,
150 (1985).
In his nine page October 10, 2017 R & R, the Magistrate Judge carefully
considered Petitioner's motion for immediate release from Respondent's custody.
Observing that the Vermont Supreme Court was considering Petitioner's request for
relief from the order of hospitalization and involuntary medication order on direct appeal,
the Magistrate Judge correctly concluded that Petitioner had failed to exhaust her state
court remedies. See 28 U.S.C. § 2254(b)(l)(A) ("An application for a writ of habeas
corpus on behalf of a person in custody pursuant to the judgment of a State court shall not
be granted unless it appears that[] ... the applicant has exhausted the remedies available
in the courts of the State").
The Magistrate Judge nonetheless proceeded to analyze Petitioner's motion to
amend her initial petition, wherein she sought to add as respondents her two assigned
attorneys from the Mental Health Law Project and a physician at the Brattleboro Retreat.
In recommending that the court deny the motion, the Magistrate Judge noted that
Petitioner's proposed Complaint failed to contain a short and plain statement establishing

either the grounds for the court's jurisdiction or Petitioner's entitlement to relief as
required by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and this court's Local Rules. See Fed.
R. Civ. P. 8(a); L.R. 15(a).

2

With respect to Respondent's motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction and failure
to state a claim, the Magistrate Judge noted that Petitioner was discharged from
Respondent's custody on October 4, 2017. On that basis, the Magistrate Judge properly
recommended that the court grant Respondent's motion to dismiss and deny Petitioner's
petition for writ of habeas corpus because the relief Petitioner sought was no longer
necessary. See Ogunwomoju v. United States, 512 F.3d 69, 73 (2d Cir. 2008) (quoting 28
U.S.C. § 2254(a)) ("A petitioner must be 'in custody' in order to invoke habeas
jurisdiction of the federal courts."). The court finds the Magistrate Judge's conclusions
well-reasoned and consistent with the applicable law.

CONCLUSION
For the foregoing reasons, the court hereby ADOPTS the Magistrate Judge's
October 10, 2017 R & R (Doc. 11) and DENIES Petitioner's motions for immediate
release and to amend her initial petition for writ of habeas corpus (Docs. 1 & 4 ). The
court further ADOPTS the Magistrate Judge's December 14, 2017 R & R (Doc. 13) and
GRANTS Respondent's motion to dismiss (Doc. 12). The court hereby DENIES and
DISMISSES Petitioner's petition for writ of habeas corpus (Doc. 1). Petitioner's motion
for release from unlawful confinement (Doc. 6) is DENIED AS MOOT.
Pursuant to Fed. R. App. P. 22(b)(l) and 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2), the court
DENIES Petitioner a certificate of appealability in this matter because Petitioner has
failed to make a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.
SO ORDERED.
Dated at Burlington, in the District of Vermont, this

Z 2 " iay of January, 2018.

Christina Reiss, District Judge
United States District Court

3