Abieanga v. Eischen
- Jerry Blackwell
- 0:24-cv-03131
- U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
- 2
In Abieanga v. Eischen, Judge Blackwell accepted the report, denied Abieanga’s petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2241, and dismissed the matter without prejudice.
Charles Abieanga’s § 2241 petition was denied, and his matter was dismissed without prejudice.
What happened
In Abieanga v. Eischen, Charles Abieanga asked for relief under a federal law allowing a person in custody to challenge certain aspects of detention. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims or the reason for seeking relief.
Magistrate Judge John F. Docherty issued a report and recommendation on September 18, 2024. No objections were filed, so the district court reviewed the recommendation for clear error and found none.
Judge Jerry W. Blackwell accepted the recommendation, denied Abieanga’s petition, and dismissed the matter without prejudice. The order does not state the underlying basis for the denial or dismissal.
The detailed version
- Abieanga v. Eischen · No. 0:24-cv-03131
- Jerry W. Blackwell
- Oct. 23, 2024
Background
Charles Abieanga filed a petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2241, a federal law that permits certain challenges to a person’s detention or the administration of a sentence. The opinion does not describe the petition’s specific claims or the relief requested beyond identifying it as a petition for a writ of habeas corpus.
Report and Recommendation
United States Magistrate Judge John F. Docherty issued a report and recommendation on September 18, 2024. No objections were filed within the permitted time. Because there were no timely objections, the district court reviewed the recommendation for clear error and found none.
Ruling
The court accepted the September 18, 2024 report and recommendation. It denied Charles Abieanga’s petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 and dismissed the matter without prejudice. The opinion does not state the underlying reason for the denial or dismissal.
Disposition
The petition was denied, and the matter was dismissed without prejudice. The court ordered judgment to be entered accordingly.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.