Braun v. Minnesota Department of Corrections, The

Background

Nathan Christopher Braun commenced the action pro se by filing a petition for a writ of habeas corpus. He later filed a separate petition adding claims. Magistrate Judge David T. Schultz issued a Report and Recommendation recommending that the first petition be dismissed without prejudice for failure to exhaust state-court remedies, that the second petition be construed as a motion to amend and denied as futile, that Braun’s application to proceed without prepaying fees or costs be denied as moot, and that a certificate of appealability issue on whether Braun’s failure to exhaust should be excused.

Both Braun and the respondents objected. Braun challenged the recommendations concerning exhaustion and amendment. The respondents challenged the recommendation that a certificate of appealability issue.

Court’s analysis

Because both sides objected, the district court conducted a new review of the challenged portions of the Report and Recommendation under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and the applicable local rule. The court agreed with the magistrate judge’s analysis and conclusions almost entirely.

The court held that Braun had failed to exhaust available state remedies. Specifically, he had not challenged the administrative calculation of his sentence in a state habeas petition, and he had not shown that available state-court procedures were insufficient to protect his rights. The court rejected Braun’s reliance on delayed or unsuccessful prior efforts to correct or alter his sentence, finding that those efforts did not establish special circumstances excusing complete exhaustion.

A certificate of appealability is required for certain habeas appeals and issues only when the petitioner makes a substantial showing that a constitutional right was denied. The court concluded that no reasonable jurist would disagree with the recommendation not to excuse Braun’s failure to exhaust or consider that issue debatable. It therefore determined that no certificate of appealability should issue.

Disposition

Judge Eric C. Tostrud ordered the following:

- The respondents’ objections to the Report and Recommendation were sustained. - Braun’s objections were overruled. - The Report and Recommendation was accepted in part. - Braun’s first petition for habeas relief was dismissed without prejudice for failure to exhaust state-court remedies. - Braun’s application to proceed without prepaying fees or costs was denied as moot. - Braun’s second petition, construed as a motion to amend the first petition, was denied. - No certificate of appealability shall issue.

The order directed that judgment be entered accordingly.