Kamberger v. Frakes - Document 39
Court Description:
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS by Judge Benjamin H Settle re 23 Report and Recommendation. (TG; cc mailed to petitioner)
Loading PDF...
1
2
3
4
5
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT TACOMA
6
7
8
MICHAEL AARON KAMBERGER,
9
Petitioner,
10
11
v.
Case No. C11-5465BHS
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT
AND RECOMMENDATION
SCOTT FRAKES,
12
Respondent.
13
14
This matter comes before the Court on the Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) of
15
the Honorable Karen L. Strombom, United States Magistrate Judge (Dkt. 23) and Petitioner
16
Michael Aaron Kamberger’s (“Kamberger”) objections to the R&R (Dkt. 25).
17
On July 6, 2011, Kamberger filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus based upon an
18
alleged violation of RCW 9.98.010. Dkt. 8. On November 30, 2011, Judge Strombom
19
issued the R&R recommending that the Court deny the petition on the merits because there
20
is no federal habeas relief for errors of state law. Dkt. 23. On December 21, 2011,
21
Kamberger filed objections. Dkt. 25.
22
First, the Court agrees with and adopts the R&R. The issue presented to the
23
Washington Court of Appeals was purely an issue of state law, and this Court may not
24
provide relief for any error of state law. Estelle v. McGuire, 502 U.S. 62, 67 (1991) (“We
25
have stated many times that ‘federal habeas corpus relief does not lie for errors of state
26
law.’”) (quoting Lewis v. Jeffers, 497 U.S. 764, 780 (1990)). Any objection requesting the
27
Court to consider the alleged error of state law is without merit.
28
ORDER – 1
1
Second, Kamberger objects to dismissal of his petition by arguing that he should be
2
allowed to amend the petition to add additional grounds for relief such as denial of speedy
3
trial and ineffective assistance of counsel. Dkt. 25 at 3-5. Kamberger, however, has failed
4
to show that these claims were fully presented to the state court. Lambrix v. Singletary, 520
5
U.S. 518, 523-24 (1997) (petitioner bears the burden to prove that a claim is properly
6
exhausted.). Therefore, leave to amend is denied because any amendment would be futile.
7
The Court having considered the R&R, Kamberger’s objections, and the remaining
8
record, does hereby find and order as follows:
9
(1)
The R&R is ADOPTED;
10
(2)
A Certificate of Appealability is DENIED;
11
(3)
The petition for writ of habeas corpus is DENIED; and
12
(4)
This action is DISMISSED.
13
DATED this 24th day of January, 2012.
14
15
BENJAMIN H. SETTLE
United States District Judge
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
A
ORDER – 2
