Williamson v. Eischen
- Eric Tostrud
- 0:23-cv-02165
- U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
- 1
In Williamson v. Eischen, Judge Tostrud accepted the recommendation, denied Williamson’s federal habeas petition, and dismissed the matter without prejudice.
Van Williamson, the petitioner, whose federal habeas petition was denied and whose matter was dismissed without prejudice; B. Eischen, identified as the warden of FPC Duluth, was the defendant.
What happened
In Williamson v. Eischen, Van Williamson filed a petition seeking habeas relief under federal law. Magistrate Judge Douglas L. Micko issued a report and recommendation, and no party objected.
Because there were no objections, the court reviewed the recommendation for clear error. The opinion does not explain the underlying reasons for denying the petition.
Judge Tostrud found no clear error, accepted the report and recommendation, denied Williamson’s petition, and dismissed the matter without prejudice.
The detailed version
- Williamson v. Eischen · No. 0:23-cv-02165
- Eric Tostrud
- Sept. 11, 2024
Background
Van Williamson petitioned for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. Magistrate Judge Douglas L. Micko issued a Report and Recommendation on August 12, 2024. The opinion states that no party objected to the recommendation.
Court’s action
Because there were no objections, the court reviewed the Report and Recommendation for clear error, meaning an obvious mistake. The court found no clear error and accepted the recommendation. It denied Williamson’s petition and dismissed the matter without prejudice, meaning the dismissal did not bar refiling. The opinion does not provide the underlying reasoning for denying the petition.
Disposition
The Report and Recommendation was accepted, the § 2241 petition was denied, and the matter was dismissed without prejudice. Judgment was ordered to be entered.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.