Turner v. State of Minnesota and County of Clay
- Laura Provinzino
- 0:25-cv-03996
- U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
- 2
In Turner v. State of Minnesota, Judge Provinzino dismissed Marvin James Turner's court-filing petition without prejudice for failure to keep his case moving forward.
Individuals who have filed — or are considering filing — federal habeas corpus petitions and who may be at risk of dismissal if they do not actively pursue their cases by meeting court deadlines and requirements.
What happened
In Marvin James Turner v. State of Minnesota and County of Clay (Case No. 25-cv-3996), Marvin James Turner filed a petition asking the federal court to review his detention — a request known as a petition for a writ of habeas corpus — against the State of Minnesota and County of Clay. A magistrate judge, Shannon G. Elkins, issued a Report and Recommendation on November 17, 2025, recommending that the case be thrown out because Turner failed to prosecute it, meaning he did not take the required steps to move his case forward. Turner did not object to that recommendation within the allowed time.
Because no objections were filed, the court reviewed the magistrate judge's recommendation only for clear error — a more limited review than it would otherwise conduct. The court found no clear error in the recommendation.
Judge Laura M. Provinzino adopted the Report and Recommendation in full and dismissed Turner's petition without prejudice, meaning Turner is not permanently barred from refiling and may be able to bring a similar claim again.
The detailed version
- Turner v. State of Minnesota and County of Clay · No. 0:25-cv-03996
- Laura M. Provinzino
- Dec. 3, 2025
Background
Plaintiff Marvin James Turner, proceeding against the State of Minnesota and County of Clay, filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus — a legal mechanism by which a person in custody can ask a federal court to review whether their detention is lawful. The opinion does not describe the underlying facts of Turner's custody or the specific grounds he raised in the petition.
Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation
United States Magistrate Judge Shannon G. Elkins issued a Report and Recommendation (R&R) on November 17, 2025, recommending dismissal of Turner's petition under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b), which authorizes a court to dismiss a case when a plaintiff fails to prosecute it — that is, fails to take the steps necessary to move the case forward. The opinion does not detail which specific actions Turner failed to take.
Standard of Review
Because no party objected to the R&R within the time permitted by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b)(2), the court applied a clear error standard of review, citing Grinder v. Gammon, 73 F.3d 793, 795 (8th Cir. 1996). This is a deferential standard; the court will only reject the magistrate judge's recommendation if it identifies a plain mistake.
Ruling
Judge Provinzino found no clear error in the R&R and adopted it in full. The petition (ECF No. 1) was dismissed without prejudice under Rule 41(b). A dismissal without prejudice means Turner is not permanently barred from refiling; the opinion does not, however, address any conditions or time limits that might govern any future filing.
Note on Scope
This order is narrow in scope: it resolves only the procedural question of whether the case should be dismissed for failure to prosecute. The court did not reach the merits of Turner's habeas claims.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.