Boe v. Clay County Sheriff Office
- Nancy Brasel
- 0:25-cv-03005
- U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
- 2
In Boe v. Clay County Sheriff Office, Judge Brasel denied without prejudice Edward Bankey Boe's petition for court-ordered release from custody.
Individuals held in custody by a county sheriff's office who file federal habeas petitions seeking release, particularly in cases where a magistrate judge recommends denial and no objections are filed.
What happened
In Boe v. Clay County Sheriff Office (Case No. 25-CV-3005), Edward Bankey Boe filed a petition asking a federal court to order his release from custody held by the Clay County Sheriff Office. A magistrate judge reviewed the petition and issued a report recommending it be denied. No party objected to that recommendation.
Because no objections were filed, the district court reviewed the magistrate judge's report only for obvious errors. Finding none, the court accepted the report and recommendation in full.
Judge Nancy E. Brasel denied Boe's petition without prejudice — meaning he is not permanently barred from filing again — and dismissed the case. His separate request to proceed without paying court fees was denied as no longer relevant given the dismissal. The court also declined to issue a certificate of appealability, which is a document required to appeal the denial of this type of petition to a higher court.
The detailed version
- Boe v. Clay County Sheriff Office · No. 0:25-cv-03005
- Nancy Brasel
- Oct. 6, 2025
Background
Edward Bankey Boe, the petitioner, filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus — a legal request asking a federal court to order his release from custody — against the Clay County Sheriff Office. Along with the petition, Boe filed an application to proceed without prepaying court fees (known as "in forma pauperis" status).
Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation
United States Magistrate Judge Leo I. Brisbois issued a Report and Recommendation on September 3, 2025, recommending that the petition be denied. The opinion does not describe the specific grounds for that recommendation. No party filed objections to the report.
Standard of Review
Because no objections were filed, the district court applied a "clear error" standard of review under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b), citing Grinder v. Gammon, 73 F.3d 793, 795 (8th Cir. 1996). This is a deferential standard, meaning the court only looks for obvious mistakes rather than conducting a full independent review.
Rulings
Finding no clear error, Judge Brasel:
- Accepted the Report and Recommendation.
- Denied the habeas petition without prejudice, meaning Boe is not permanently barred from re-filing.
- Dismissed the action.
- Denied the fee-waiver application as moot (no longer relevant given the dismissal).
- Declined to issue a certificate of appealability — a document that a petitioner must obtain before appealing the denial of a habeas petition to a higher court.
Notable Gaps
The opinion does not describe the underlying facts of Boe's custody, the legal grounds on which the petition was filed, or the specific reasoning in the magistrate judge's Report and Recommendation. The court's order is brief and administrative in nature, accepting the earlier recommendation without elaboration.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.