Document: 418 U.S. 461 94 S.Ct. 2842 41 L.Ed.2d 879 John W. WINGO, Warden, Petitioner,v.Carl James WEDDING. No. 73—846. Argued April 22, 1974. Decided June 26, Syllabus Following enactment of the Federal Magistrates Act, United States District Court for Western Kentucky amended its Local Rule 16 to provide that in addition submitting such other reports and recommendations as may be reequired concerning petitions writs habeas corpus from state prisoners full-time magistrate shall 'schedule hear evidentiary matters . (to electronically recorded) deemed by Magistrate necessary proper determination petition, report thereon with an appropriate recommendation disposition thereof Judge (who) (u)pon request proceed recording testimony give it de novo consideration.' Respondent, a prisoner, whose petition was assigned processing, claimed is invalid filed motion disqualified holding hearing district judge. The denied motion; proceeded hearing; thereafter he transmitted electronic along his written findings conclusions recommending dismissal. Court, following respondent's hearing, listened recording, on basis which, together Magistrate's conclusions, dismissed petition. Appeals reversed, that, notwithstanding formal revision statute, 28 U.S.C. § 2243, construction predecessor statute given Holiday v. Johnson, 313 342, 61 1015, 85 L.Ed. 1392, still applied, effect plainly accorded prisoner seeking relief right testifying before Held: 1. Title like predecessor, Rev.Stat. 761, requires judge personally conduct hearings federal cases. supra; Hayman, 342 205, 231 n. 16, 72 263, 269, 96 232; Brown Allen, 344 443, 462—463, 73 397, 409—411, 97 469. Pp. 468—469. 2. It clear text legislative history Act Congress did not intend alter requirements therefore insofar authorizes hold hearings, because 'inconsistent laws States' under 636(b) itself precludes assigning duty conducting limits magistrate's review proposing, holding, hearing. 469—473. 3. invalidity cured procedure relating which does enable evaluate credibility observing witnesses. 473—474. 483 F.2d 1131, 6 Cir., affirmed. M. Ringo, Frankfort, Ky., petitioner. Joseph G. Glass, Louisville, respondent. Mr. Justice BRENNAN delivered opinion Court. 1 question here whether magistrates are authorized In 1968, enacted §§ 631—639, upgrade expand former commissioner system. exercise all powers formerly exercised commissioners,1 also, means relieving caseload burden judges, empowers try minor offenses when parties consent,2 perform additional duties court 'not inconsistent Constitution States.'3 Pursuant Judges provide: 2 'In required prisoners, directed schedule each having jurisdiction case. cause recorded suitable sound equipment. He submit proposed fact law consideration, copies provided at time petitioner respondent, expeditiously transmit proceedings, including testimony, Judge. Upon either party, within ten days date so thereof, Respondent processing rule. part rule challenged directs 'to this portion meaning 636(b), or should construed preclude courts magistrates. 3 * Carl Wedding, State Penitentiary serving life sentence imposed 1949 Webster Circuit Commonwealth Kentucky, after plea guilty charge willful murder. Wedding 1971. After Sixth reversed initial dismissal 456 245 (1972), remanded invoked case promptly moved reassigned Judge, ground authorize assign hearings. When motion, testimonial evidence 16. Thereafter, submitted dismissed. 4 matter Judge's response listen, Magistrate. On entered order dismissing 5 appeal renewed challenge relying upon Johnston, U.s. 1392 (1941). also There, determining writ alleged facts if proved, would entitle relief, issued compelling respondent produce designated Commissioner. Commissioner held testified depositions two received, made stated denied. oral argument Commissioner's report, discharging writ. This factfinding employed failed conform Congress' express command Habeas Corpus '(t)he court, justice, summary way determine case, arguments, thereupon dispose party justice require.' (1940 ed.) (emphasis added). hat accords judge, stating: 7 'One essential elements crucial weighing appraising testimony. Plainly intended might invoke appraisal himself. We cannot say truth prisoner's master is, light purpose object proceeding, equivalent judge's own function trier facts. 8 'The himself have heard and, found based findings.' supra, 352, 353—354, S.Ct., 1018. 9 contended neither nor evidences congressional intent overrule Holiday. agreed accordingly 'vacate(d) judgment remand(ed) instructions (District) (Wedding's) constitutional claims.' 1137 (CA6 1973). granted certiorari, 414 1157, 914, 39 109 (1974). affirm.4 II 10 Under our framework, 'great privilege' corpus, Ex parte Bollman, Cranch 75, 95, 554 (1807) (Marshall, C.J.), has historically 'a prompt efficacious remedy whatever society deems intolerable restraints. Its root principle civilized society, government must always accountable judiciary man's imprisonment: imprisonment shown fundamental law, individual entitled immediate release.' Fay Noia, 372 391, 401—402, 83 822, 829, 274 (1963). More often than not, claims unconstitutional detention turn resolution contested issues fact. Accordingly, since Judiciary February 5, 1867, c. 28, 1, 14 Stat. 385, expressly vested plenary power 'for taking trying anew ..'5 416, 836. See Townsend Sain, 293, 312, 745, 756, 770 11 connection 1948 recodification Judicial Code,6 Holiday, procedural provisions were consolidated into 2243. pertinent covering provides summarily facts, Revisers thus deleted some words but Revisers' Notes accompanying Committee Senate,7 House,8 make abundantly word changes omissions 761 only form.9 12 been 213 232 (1952); 469 (1953). latter case: 13 'A application 'summarily require,' long law. R.S. old 461.' Ibid. III Our inquiry narrowed changed requirement 2243 judges Certainly nothing suggests meant change requirement.10 Rather, both reveal retain requirement. For, although gives broad authority wide range magistrates, carefully circumscribed permissible scope assignment 'such States.' And defining assignable duties, decreed assignable. clearly emerges subsection (3) provides: 15 '(3) preliminary applications post-trial individuals convicted criminal offenses, submission facilitate decision over there hearing.' (Emphasis added.) That reveals Conference objected successive phrasings (b)(3) until phrased include posttrial relief.11 original draft subsection12 had magistrates' 17 consideration offenses.' 18 But language susceptibel interpretation it.13 rewritten 19 ..' 20 Administration Criminal Law 'make responsibility ultimate decisions applications, rather magistrate.'14 recommended phrase 'as hearing' immediately 'case.'15 made,16 present form enacted. Thus, 'additional include, restricted to,' defined (b)(3), compels conclusion deliberate choice 21 conclude cases, 636(b). further extent because, we construe section hearings.17 Review limited hearings.18 propose agree receive record affidavits, stipulations, documents parties.19 prohibited actual hearings.20 22 provision 'District reasoned now designed recognition '(o)ne testimony.' U.S., 'To experienced lawyers commonplace outcome lawsuit—and hence vindication legal rights—depends more how factfinder appraises disputed line precedents. Thus procedures determined assume importance fully great validity substantive applied.' Speiser Randall, 357 513, 520, 78 1332, 1339, 1460 (1958). Congress, held, '(p)lainly himself.' circumstance, 'cannot testimony' listening it, 'is, facts.' 23 Affirmed. 24 Chief BURGER, whom WHITE joins, dissenting. 25 today reads separate statutes prior cases reach result contrary purposes underlying 1968 631 et seq., every occasion consider matter.1 26 'designed create upgraded lower tier judicial office,' S.Rep.No. 371, 90th Cong., 1st Sess., (1967), 'intended cull ever-growing workload desirably performed officers.' H.R.Rep.No. 1629, 2d (1968), U.S.Code Cong. & Admin.News, p. 4254. Court's new status deputy magistrates,2 serves defeat objective described Senator Tydings, principal sponsor, see 2, devote trial writing opinions.'3 Hearings 27 two-stage analysis, finds first terms States,' permit so, said, 33 years ago, confine alone. Code, incorporated carried forward limitation despite critical change. Neither drafting history, these support conclusion. Section did, notes, import set forth what involved corpus. originally read 'court, judge,' simply 'court.' fails note second 755, issue made. 755 identical facts: judge.' Unlike however, quoted substantially unchanged; judge' who 29 sought certain could writ; changing to, simply, 'court,' broaden least permitting delegation function, subject approval judge.4 To any impute statutory language, already finally without knowledge alteration raise interpretive difficulties. Moreover, does, ante, 9, '(m)ere phraseology,' undertaken uniformity. If, Charles J. Zinn, counsel Revision revised testified, 'we get uniform style,'5 then same provision, surely 'courts' able writs, well claim. 30 Nor do cited 469, inapposite. segment relevant Brown's discussion 2254 earlier presented refused court. quotes Brown: 'This law,' referring called 'general rule' approved Salinger Loisel, 265 224, 231, 44 519, 521, 68 989 (1924). Brown, 463, 410. makes 'long law' pertains quoted, 462, 409, (the party) (may) Salinger, disposed discretion, controlling weight refusal (by court) discharge application.' extended circumstances writ, no relies one discretion bearing official once one. proposition placed ('court, judge') applies ('court') 31 Hayman concerned solely may, decide factual 2255, where movant notified present. context discussing material evidence, ex dropped footnote stating '(n)or can commissioner,' citing 269. Not completely irrelevant citation support, discussion, manifest subsequent (Rev.Stat. 761) construed. fulfillment hang slim reed. 32 Even assuming carry Holiday's enacting particularly eliminate restriction. while speak 'commissioner,' title office, qualifications functions office. permits 'be sets three subdivisions rule, 'are to' those forth. third illustrative subdivision 34 'preliminary 636(b)(3). 35 Subdivision (3), suggesting merely illustrative, exclusive. 36 mention categories illustrate general character act, constitute exclusive specification assignable.' S.Rep.No.371, (1967). 37 House Report virtually tracks Senate Report. H.R.Rep.No.1629, (1968). being barrier hearings,6 barrier, Part I, enables courts, here, establish rules permit. 38 Assuming, arguendo, possible rules, elimination barrier. determines, stage 469—473, opposite result, perception less discriminating. linchpin evolution subdivison above. 'consideration' 'review,'7 hearing,'8 bar due fear thought final adjudicatory power, them retained power.9 Indeed, specifically intended. As stated, 'contemplates assignments reserved 40 concern about enabling early expression bill colloquy between Tydings Assistant Attorney General Vinson. Vinson ultimately revealed real letter Subcommittee drafted magistrate: '(I)f involve adjudication, handled Article Judge.' 130. viewed Vinson's objections Tydings' subcommittee Committee. S. 945 al. Judiciary, objection, hearings: 42 'We wouldn't magistrate. (be to) (habeas) .. certainly that.' 112. 43 Numerous witnesses urged permitted See, e.g., id., 52 (Chief Northrop, 3); Walter E. Hoffman, Eastern Virginia). points out, 470—471, (S. 3475), states. Instead, altogether, fearing attack. Although specified, seems speaking 'delegation' initially shared delegating decisionmaking Art. judges. 241n. modified version complete subdivisions. 945), enacted, introduced, follow recommendation, continued hearing,' 7, again stressed was, 3475, 'delegation magistrates.' 245. 45 tension established clear. hand, apprehension authorization lead exclusively avoid accomplish former, persisted retaining (3). only, earlier, limit subsection, insure authorizing cases.10 46 Plainly, used precluded latter. anyone, Conference, alone intention vest Conversely, taken risks Hoffman 47 'Judge Hoffman. I suggested my statement task all, (habeas proceedings) civil proceedings proceedings. 48 'Senator Tydings. (S)ince don't (in 636(b)) 'Including hearings' 'including hearings,' have? 49 am fearful someone will effort delegate function. 50 think good point, Hoffman.' 93—94. 51 need magistrate, ambiguous unlimited (3)—should interpreted notwithstanding, (1) discussed permission intended, (2) serve objectives Act. nn. 3, supra. Constitution,' needs little here. suggest retains process Where situation obtains, constitutional.11 53 amendment outright rejection, could, behest himself, example, their application. problem magnitude foreseen particulars comport requirements. event, intent, act restate intentions declared out. Commissioners empowered Rules Procedure oaths (Rule arrest warrants 4); examinations arrestees 5); subpoenas 17); removal another 40); release defendants bail 46). addition, commissioners persons accused petty (defined 1(3) crimes penalty exceed six months fine $500 both) committed confines enclaves, 62 830. administering bail, acknowledgments, depositions. 917. commissioners, extends anywhere includes punishable exceeding year, $1,000, both. '(b) Any States, concurrence majority pursuant or, reasonably available, part-time specially territorial States. to— '(1) service special action, applicable Civil courts; '(2) assistance pretrial discovery actions; require constitutionally enact legislation vesting authority, petitions. indicate views investing officer 'outside pale Constitution.' 1133 'court arguments interested, appear deprived her liberty contravention constitution she forthwith discharged liberty.' 869. 1559, 80th (1948). 308, A178 (1947). Moore, Commentary Code 436 (1949); Payne Wingo, 442 1192, 1194 1971). Had attention William Barron, Reviser explained: '(N)o policy presumed unless expressed. Mere phraseology work simpler revised.' Revision, F.R.D. 439, 445—446. (1948); A full TPO, Inc. McMillen, 460 348 (CA7 1972). gave safeguards. 636(a)(3) trials 3401 person charged offense elect tried 636(b)(1) masters frequently involves hearings—but Procedure, restrictions 53(b) 'reference exception rule.' Note, Developments Law—Federal Corpus. Harv.L.Rev. 1038, 1189 229 (1970). 1966, 89th Sess. (1966). Law, adopted September reprinted 3475 Improvements Machinery (1966) pp. 241j, March 1967, 244, 945, Shapiro, Corpus: Study Massachusetts, 87 321, 364—365 (1973); Corpus, 1188—1189 qualified, will, hoped, acquire expertise examining (post-conviction review) summarizing important contents thereby facilitating decisions. clerks presently many noted normal 1-year clerkship afford experience attain efficiency handling applications.' O'Shea 491 774 (CA1 1974), Noorlander Ciccone, 489 642 (CA8 1973), accept disagree. Such Since call relieve most details significantly overburdened they data Administrative Office Courts very few ever stage. 1973, 10,800 2255 motions vacate sentence, 5%, approximately 530, necessitated Director Courts, Table C—2, 325, C—8, 383 (1973). required, 88% completed day less. Id., 383. among 400 Judges, averages 1.5 per year. 80 active Senior participate reduced. Two Circuits ruled 774, 778 1974); 642, 648 1973); cf. Campbell 501 196, 205 (CA9 assumed rel. Gonzalez Zelker, 477 797, 798 (CA2 Parnell Wainwright, 464 735, 736 (CA5 clear, 473 18, sees dealing previously clerks. Theodore Levin, Michigan, Committee's Machinery, chairmanship D. began investigative 1965 led later, overworked, better tasks. somewhat tedious job likely entice seasoned competent lawyer job.' (hereinafter Hearings). 'the position (of magistrate) attractive highly qualified individuals.' Department Act's purpose, 130, Robert C. Belloni Dean B. Yegge 'should high-paid clerks.' Reports 59 203, 221 clerk's undercuts goal (give stature higher commissioner.' 26. No dispute heavy represented receive, large volume recognized 'repetitious patently frivolous.' 212, 268, (1952) (footnote omitted). minimize stage, 20, beguiling simplicity statistical analysis obscures reality antagonistic interests petitioners. First, average year evenly across country recognize uneven number received various courts. Edward Maryland, reflected unevenness 'State country.' 52. Clearly Northrop's exceeded '1.5 year.' Second, represent warrant stated: (hold) plenary, Now, happens practical matter, you clerk reviews papers giving (petitioner) actually opportunity gets now.' 113. Finally, even burdens them. virtues speedy elaborated II, infra, anyone question, H.R. 1600 2055, today, properly framed, contravene rights III, infra. interchangeably history. 3475) 'consideration,' Staff Memorandum 'review.' 34. use 'review,' 945) 'consideration.' Despite Report, setting enumerated examples '(m) agistrates reviewing reporting postconviction relief.' 4262. nature indicated. reference twice reference, 471 11, 17, 1188—1189, (1970), position. Both references mistakenly addressed decision. Note concedes '(i)t argue (under plan valid Act.' 229. argues 636(a)(3). refers, 470—471 11. goes beyond masters, 636(b)(1), Fed.Rules Civ.Proc. 53(b), strictures employing developed existence office arguably applied generally Comment, An Adjudicative Role Cases, U.Chi.L.Rev. 584 agrees (contrary conclusion, 470) 'could expressed.' Tr. Oral Arg. 20. commentators 365 Peterson, Act: New Dimension Implementation Justice, 56 Iowa L.Rev. 62, 98 (1970); Doyle (District Chairman implementing Act), Implementing J.B.A.Kan. 25, 69 Proposed Reformation Procedure: Use Magistrates, 54 1147 (1969). So, too, agreement. Amendments Governing Proceedings Practice (Preliminary Draft, Jan. nature, 636(a)(3), grant limited, appears prohibition. Cf. Palmore 411 389, 93 1670, fortiori granting comports 196 1974) (hearings suppress); Harlem River Consumers Coop., Associated Grocers Harlem, Inc., 551 (SDNY 1972) motion).

Category: 0