Legal Document

474 U.S. 140 106 S.Ct. 466 88 L.Ed.2d 435 Kathy THOMAS, Petitionerv.Dorothy ARN, Superintendent, Ohio Reformatory for Women. No. 84-5630. Argued Oct. 7, 1985. Decided Dec. 4, Rehearing Denied Jan. 27, 1986. See 1111, 899. Syllabus Petitioner was convicted of homicide in an court, and ultimately the Supreme Court upheld conviction. She sought habeas corpus relief Federal District Court, which referred case to a Magistrate, who issued report recommending denial writ containing proposed findings conclusions law notice that failure file objections within 10 days waived right appeal Court's order. failed even though she had received extension time do so, but Judge sua sponte reviewed entire record de novo dismissed petition on merits. On appeal, petitioner provided no explanation her object Magistrate's report. Without reaching merits, Appeals affirmed, holding by failing Held: A court appeals may adopt rule conditioning when taken from district judgment adopts magistrate's recommendation, upon filing with identifying those issues further review is desired. Such rule, at least (as here) it incorporates clear litigants opportunity seek objections, valid exercise court's supervisory power does not violate either Magistrates Act or Constitution. Pp. 145-155. (a) Here, intended procedure its power. Neither intent nor practical effect waiver restrict own jurisdiction. 145-146. (b) The courts have powers permit, least, promulgation procedural rules governing management litigation. fact Sixth Circuit has deemed forfeited statutory enough, standing alone, invalidate Moreover, Circuit's decision require supported sound considerations judicial economy. 146-148 (c) language legislative history Act—which provides litigant "may" thus obtain judge, 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C)—supports petitioner's argument precludes adopted Circuit. under some lesser standard than objection filed. Nor obligatory extend only law. appellate inconsistent Act's purposes. 148-153. (d) Article III Although magistrate refer dispositive motions recommendation so long as process takes place control jurisdiction, judge exercises ultimate authority issue appropriate implicate III, because appeals, must supervision over magistrate, elevate adjunct functional equivalent judge. Due Process Clause Fifth Amendment. Petitioner's denied; merely conditioned piece paper. 153-155. 728 F.2d 813 (CA6 1984), affirmed. MARSHALL, J., delivered opinion BURGER, C.J., WHITE, POWELL, REHNQUIST, O'CONNOR, JJ., joined. BRENNAN, filed dissenting opinion, BLACKMUN, joined, post, P. 156. STEVENS, P 157. Christopher Danahy Stanley, Cleveland, Ohio, petitioner. Richard David Drake, Columbus, respondent. Justice MARSHALL Court. 1 In 1976, Congress amended 101 Act, 636, provide United States pretrial motions, petitions corpus, shall conduct proceedings recommend dispositions. Pub.L. 94-577, 90 Stat. 2729.1 amendments also any party disagrees recommendations "may serve written objections" report, judge.2 question presented whether establish waives judgment. We hold may. 2 * 1978 fatally shooting common-law husband during argument. evidence trial showed victim violent man beaten number occasions previous three years. raised self-defense trial, call two witnesses would present expert testimony concerning Battered Wife Syndrome. After conducting voir dire these chambers, refused admit testimony, grounds jury did need assistance understand witnesses, personally examined petitioner, could testify about state mind shooting. 3 Cuyahoga County reversed. State v. Thomas, 64 App.2d 141, 411 N.E.2d 845 (1979). syllabus3 concluded Syndrome admissible "to afford understanding defendant's committed homicide." App. 9. discretionary review, 66 St.2d 518, 423 137 (1981). held irrelevant self-defense, prejudicial outweigh probative value. Having exhausted remedies, Northern Ohio. raised, inter alia, denied fair refusal memorandum support petition. Judge, acting pursuant 636(b)(1)(B), case, including law, Magistrate. Magistrate hearing. May 11, 1982, his be denied. proffered impaired fundamental fairness therefore adequate ground relief. 4 last page contained prominent legend: 5 "ANY OBJECTIONS this Report Recommendation Clerk Courts ten (10) receipt notice. Failure specified See: Walters, 638 947 (6th Cir.1981)." 6 Despite notice, time. through June 15, "this entails many substantive counsel needs more write brief." However, made submissions merits Notwithstanding "review[ed] . novo," 59, granted leave appeal. 7 brief testimony. Counsel oral argument, decided briefs. (1984). Id., 815. relied prior (1981), established prospective timely subsequent appeals. certiorari, 470 1027, 105 1391, 84 781 (1985), we now affirm. II 8 supra, appellant disposition case. then brought considered threshold appellant's apprise disagreement held: 9 "The permissive 636 suggests party's review. congressional policy underlying Act—to improve access federal aid efficient administration justice—is best served our else waive Additionally, power, informed waived. 11 "However, give ruling should promote, defeat ends justice. ." 949-950 (footnote citations omitted). 12 nature application demonstrate "rul[e] procedure," id., 950, powers. Later opinions make views Walters way. Patterson Mintzes, 717 284, 286 (1983) ("In promulgated [a] waiver"); Martin, 704 267, 275 (Jones, concurring) (characterizing "[r]ulemaking powers"). Thus, first contention—that jurisdiction it—is simply inaccurate. expressly acknowledged subject-matter F.2d, 814. shown jurisdictional excusing default recent supra (considering despite pro se litigant's late objections). conclude neither jurisdiction.4 13 It cannot doubted Cf. Cuyler Sullivan, 446 335, 346, n. 10, 100 1708, 1717, 333 (1980) (approving inquiry joint representation criminal defendants). Indeed, mandate "procedures desirable viewpoint practice although nowise commanded statute Constitution." Cupp Naughten, 414 146, 94 396, 400, 38 368 (1973); see Barker Wingo, 407 514, 530, 29, 92 2182, 2192, 33 (1972).5 Had comply scheduling order pay fee certainly dismiss Link Wabash R. Co., 370 626, 82 1386, 734 (1962) (recognizing "inherent power" want prosecution). 14 enables focus attention factual legal—that are heart parties' dispute.6 precluding prevents "sandbagging" appealing. Absent such before proper subject This force consider claims were never every matter how thorough analysis if both parties satisfied Either result inefficient use resources. short, "[t]he same rationale raising circuit applies here." Schronce, 727 91, (CA4) omitted), cert. denied, 467 1208, 104 2395, 81 352 IV 15 Even sensible however, invalid conflicts constitutional provisions. contrary "would confer judiciary disregard limitations charged enforcing." Payner, 447 727, 737, 2439, 2447, 65 468 (1980). Thus A. 16 argues Her focuses language. nowhere states will cites Eighth conclusion "[o]ne think wished drastic consequence follow missing ten-day limit, said explicitly." Lorin Corp. Goto & 700 1202, 1206 (1983). decide mandates absent objections. forbid rule. 17 Section 636(b)(1)(C) "[a] [district] determination portions made." face all, objection. argues, purpose implicitly objects. If interpretation correct, formulated other Circuits, proceeds erroneous assumption—that constitute waiving level.7 required promote economy discussed Part supra. 18 still standard. omission seem inadvertent, "clearly law" certain matters 636(b)(1)(A). Park Motor Mart, Inc. Ford 616 603, 605 (CA1 1980). point anything 1976 mandating persuaded positively requires 19 that, extends fact. urges Congress, vest final questions automatically reject, distinction between legal issues. Once again, plain recognizes distinction.8 fail find requirement history. 20 appear conclusions, standard, objects findings. House Senate Reports accompanying what sort perform S.Rep. 94-625, pp. 9-10 (1976) (hereafter Report); H.R.Rep. 94-1609, p. (1976), U.S.Code Cong. Admin.News 6162 Report). There nothing Reports, demonstrates consideration considers appropriate.9 Subcommittee drafted hearings guidelines Administrative Office magistrates. Those recommended "[w]here makes finding motion issue, become unless specific reasonable time." Jurisdiction Magistrates, Hearings S. 1283 Improvements Judicial Machinery Committee Judiciary, 94th Cong., 1st Sess., 24 (1975) (emphasis added) Hearings). heard Metzner Southern New York, chairman Conference system, he followed practice. ("If come in, I [the record] it. sign order").10 States, eventually incorporated 636(b)(1)(C), opined most instances litigation terminate judge's adoption Hearings, 35, 37. apparently assumed, therefore, dissatisfied reason trigger review.11 indication enacting preclude treating default, sort. convinces us one 21 purposes Act. grew out Congress' desire judges "additional assistance" dealing caseload increasing far rapidly judgeships. Mathews Weber, 261, 268, 96 549, 553, 46 483 (1976).12 intend devote substantial portion their available various steps rather itself." Report, 7. indicate task transferred seems wanted reviewing reports except extent requested otherwise necessitated turn latter question. B 22 contends violates vests life tenure protection decreases salary.13 "the total jurisdiction," Raddatz, 667, 681, 2406, 2415, 424 (1980), " 'exercise[s] order,' 682, S.Ct., quoting 3. sees it, permits forecloses meaningful levels 23 untenable. magistrate. assuming, permit refuse objection, believe elevates establishes all times. He retains full enter Any desires plenary ask. while filed, request party, suggest erred. removed 'the essential attributes power,' Pipeline Co. Marathon Pipe Line 458 50, 77, 102 2858, 2874, 73 598 (1982) (plurality opinion), Crowell Benson, 285 22, 51, 52 285, 292, 76 L.Ed. (1932), tribunal.14 violation Clause. That however; notified unambiguous terms consequences file, deliberately nevertheless. recently reiterated longstanding maxim accords due terminates claim evidentiary rule." Logan Zimmerman Brush 455 422, 437, 1148, 1158, 71 265 (1982). forfeiture reasonable. Litigants afforded 'an manner,' ibid., Armstrong Manzo, 380 545, 552, 85 1187, 1191, 62 (1965), hearing Appeals. emphasize nonjurisdictional provision, excuse interests justice.15 V 25 26 Affirmed. whom BLACKMUN joins, dissenting. 27 Under sanctioned Because dissent. "any magistrate's] recommendations. 636(b)(1)(C). clearly specifies penalty report—the loses court. And not, deprives him court,* Rather, indeed obligation "accept, modify" leaves unaffected 29 applicant entitled 2253. rendered. majority attempts justify characterizing simple While Appeals' promulgate rules, sanction imposes beyond contemplated Congress. "supervisory rule" unlawfully judgment, respectfully 30 31 prohibited As product conform circuits. Hence, appearance conflict among circuits, interest uniform implicated might been well advised deny certiorari. Since elected modify respect. 32 demonstrates, cases surely permissible treat well. But precedents often recognize exception namely, decides relieved duty so. See, e.g., Oklahoma City Tuttle, 471 800, 815-816, 2427, 2432, 791 (1985) (reaching instruction overlooked default); Lee 343 747, 750, 3, 72 967, 970, 1270 (1952) ("Though discretion refusing point, having passed leads also"). addresses issue. E.g., Ulster Allen, 442 140, 149, 99 2213, 2220, 60 777 (1979); Raley 360 423, 436-437, 79 1257, 1265, 1344 (1959). cases, reasons relying bar generally, always, outweighed correctly resolved. similar recognized When elects renders resolving there danger ante, 148. enough merit warrant careful minimizing risk error prevail requiring strict compliance rules. To admittedly limited extent, Title 636(b)(1)(B) provides: "[A] designate hearings, submit disposition, excepted subparagraph (A), applications posttrial individuals offenses prisoner challenging conditions confinement." 636(b)(1)(A), included reference (B), "for injunctive relief, pleadings, summary quash indictment information defendant, suppress maintenance class action, can granted, involuntarily action." "[T]he (B) copy forthwith mailed parties. "Within after being copy, made. accept, modify, whole part, receive recommit instructions." syllabus contains controlling Engle Isaac, 456 107, 111, 1558, 1563, 783 (1982), citing Haas State, 103 St. 1, 7-8, 132 N.E. 158, 159-160 (1921). First, Second, Fourth, Circuits 603 1980); McCarthy Manson, 714 234, 237 (CA2 1983); 91 (CA4), (1984); Lewis, 621 1382, 1386 (CA5 1980), 450 935, 1400, 67 Ninth Eleventh Britt Simi Valley Unified School District, 708 452, 454 (CA9 1983) (order denying rehearing); Nettles Wainwright, 677 404 1982) (en banc); 1205-1207 (CA8 (rejecting where appeal). none spoken terms. rests firmest used procedure. Beale, Reconsidering Supervisory Power Criminal Cases: Constitutional Statutory Limits Authority Courts, Colum.L.Rev. 1433, 1465 (1984) (federal inherent regulate "technical details policies intrinsic process"). exercised authority. Tingler Marshall, 716 1109, 1112 (establishing dismissal complaints); Florea, 541 568, 572 1976) (prospective contact agent juror per prejudicial), 430 945, 97 1579, 51 792 (1977); Schiavo, 504 7-8 (CA3) banc) procedures enjoining publication trial), sub nom. Ditter Philadelphia Newspapers, Inc., 419 1096, 95 690, 42 688 (1974). resulted considerable saving original several admissibility objected aspect narrow dispute preserved exclusion Circuit, cited approval First "a 'may' chooses, 'shall' wishes consideration." 605; 950. ("When fails decision, decision") citation category includes pleadings consist exclusively points passage quotes Campbell 501 196, 206 (CA9), 879 concluded: "If contests fact, assume correctness applicable law." statement part longer quotation setting stated amendment, called circumstances, "adopted" Campbell. believe, proposition. specifically addressed difference nondispositive motion, "intended 'final' reconsider determination," 8, motion. "I talking form, substance." 12. probably magistrates without violating calling abundance caution. (statement Metzner); 35 (report States). express view accuracy opinions, they relevant intent. ("it feasible act, stage proceeding, performed 'a court' "). William Westphal, Chief Counsel) (filing "is them follow, feel aggrieved motions"). prompted Wingo Wedding, 418 461, 2842, 41 intended, 1968, enacted "restat[e] clarif[y]" functions. Constitution vested inferior ordain establish. Judges, supreme Offices good Behaviour, shall, Times, Services, Compensation, diminished Continuance Office." plurality Pipeline, concurrence noted himself remains appointed, removal, U.S., 79, 30, 2875 30; 685, 2417 (BLACKMUN, ("[T]he conceivable 'threat' 'independence' comes within, without, department"). observations, course, here, again weigh side concluding entertain properly Fed.Rule Crim.Proc. 52(b) (court correct object). standards apply considering exceptions absence "cannot reliev[e] act judicially, itself correct." 1983).

Classification Label: 0