Abdikarim v. Jahner
- Katherine Menendez
- 0:24-cv-03485
- U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
- 2
In Abdikarim v. Jahner, Judge Menendez denied Abdikarim’s habeas petition, dismissed the matter, denied fee-free status, and issued no appealability certificate.
Zakariya Abdikarim, whose petition and application to proceed without paying filing fees were denied; the respondents, because the matter was dismissed; and Abdikarim’s ability to appeal, because no certificate of appealability was issued.
What happened
Zakariya Abdikarim argued that his Minnesota state-court prosecution violated his constitutional protection against being tried twice for the same offense.
A magistrate judge recommended denying the petition because Abdikarim had made the same argument in an earlier related petition, and had not previously been placed in jeopardy for the pending charges. The district court reviewed the recommendation and Abdikarim’s objections.
Judge Katherine M. Menendez overruled the objections, accepted the recommendation, denied the petition, dismissed the matter, denied Abdikarim’s request to proceed without paying filing fees, and issued no certificate of appealability.
The detailed version
- Abdikarim v. Jahner · No. 0:24-cv-03485
- Katherine Menendez
- Dec. 18, 2024
Background
Zakariya Abdikarim filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus, a request for federal relief from allegedly unlawful custody or prosecution. He argued that his prosecution in Minnesota state court violated the constitutional protection against double jeopardy, which generally prevents a person from being prosecuted or punished twice for the same offense.
Report and Recommendation
United States Magistrate Judge Elizabeth Cowan Wright issued a Report and Recommendation dated September 13, 2024. She recommended denying the petition. The recommendation explained that Abdikarim had raised identical arguments in a prior related proceeding, No. 24-CV-2013 (D. Minn.), and that the petition failed because he had never previously been placed in jeopardy for the charges then pending against him.
District Court Review
Abdikarim timely objected to the recommendation, although his objections did not identify specific errors. The district court treated the objections as a general challenge and reviewed the entire recommendation de novo, meaning independently and anew. The court concluded that the recommendation contained no error, overruled Abdikarim’s objections, and accepted the recommendation in full.
Disposition
The court ordered that:
- The petition for a writ of habeas corpus was DENIED. - The matter was DISMISSED. - Abdikarim’s application to proceed in forma pauperis, meaning to proceed without paying the required filing fees, was DENIED. - No certificate of appealability was issued.
The order does not state whether the dismissal was with or without prejudice.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.