Wattleton v. Paul

Background

David Earl Wattleton, proceeding without a lawyer, objected to Magistrate Judge Leo I. Brisbois’s recommendation that his petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 be denied. The district court reviewed the recommendation from the beginning, as required when a party objects.

The opinion states that Wattleton had previously filed an unsuccessful § 2255 petition in the Northern District of Georgia. It also states that he had been found not guilty by reason of insanity. Wattleton argued that the magistrate judge had erred because he had neither sought nor received such a verdict.

Court’s Analysis

The court rejected Wattleton’s factual argument, finding that he had in fact been found not guilty by reason of insanity. It relied on Eighth Circuit precedent holding that a person found not guilty by reason of insanity is not eligible for relief under § 2255. The court also noted the prior unsuccessful § 2255 petition. It concluded that the recommendation was well-reasoned and correct and that Wattleton’s objection lacked merit.

Rulings

The court overruled the objection and adopted the recommendation in its entirety. It denied the application for the writ, denied the application to proceed without paying filing fees, denied the motion to amend without prejudice, denied the motion to expedite as moot, and dismissed the case without prejudice.

Because the court denied the petition based on eligibility and prior litigation rather than deciding the underlying challenge, this was a procedural disposition.