TALLEY v. OLST

Full title: JEROME TALLEY, Petitioner(s), v. KATHY VAN OLST, Respondent(s)

Court: United States District Court, W.D. Washington, at Seattle

Date published: Feb 18, 2009

NO. C08-1758MJP (W.D. Wash. Feb. 18, 2009)

Opinion

NO. C08-1758MJP.

February 18, 2009

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

MARSHA PECHMAN, District Judge

The above-entitled Court, having received and reviewed:

1. Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation (Dkt. No. 4) 2. Petitioner's Objections to Factual and Verbal Imprecision; Omission and Irrelevancy; Ambiguity and Imprecise Wording of the Report and Recommendation (Dkt. No. 7) and all attached exhibits and declarations, makes the following ruling:

IT IS ORDERED that the Court ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation and orders that this action be DISMISSED without prejudice to refiling after state criminal proceedings (including appeal) are completed.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner's application to proceed in forma pauperis is DENIED as moot.

Discussion

To the extent that it can be comprehended from his vaguely worded petition, it appears that Petitioner is a pretrial detainee objecting to unspecified violations of due process in the determination of his bail. As the Magistrate Judge pointed out in his Report and Recommendation, federal courts will not intervene in pre-sentence detention matters in state criminal proceedings unless a petitioner can demonstrate (1) exhaustion of available state judicial remedies and (2) "special circumstances" that warrant federal intervention. Carden v. Montana, 626 F.2d 82, 83-84 (9th Cir. 1980).

Plaintiff's petition provides neither of those. His objections to the Magistrate's findings go no further in supplying the necessary factual and legal predicates — they are a rambling collection of ambiguous, non-specific assertions about "due process" and verbal imprecision which do nothing to address the substantive and procedural inadequacies in his pleadings. As long as Petitioner's state criminal proceedings remain ongoing, he will need to demonstrate that he has exhausted all available state avenues before seeking relief from the federal courts.

Conclusion

Absent any showing by Petitioner of exhaustion of state remedies or "special circumstances" requiring federal intervention, this Court will order his petition DISMISSED without prejudice to refiling after state criminal proceedings (including appeal) are finished. This dismissal renders his application to proceed in forma pauperis moot, and it will be denied.

The clerk is directed to provide copies of this order to all counsel of record.