Watson v. Barnes
- Wilhelmina Wright
- 0:18-cv-01295
- U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
- 1
In Watson v. Barnes, Judge Wright adopted the recommendation, denied Watson’s habeas petition, and dismissed the action without prejudice.
Dodionne Watson’s habeas petition was denied, and his action was dismissed without prejudice; Warden Barnes remained the respondent.
What happened
In Watson v. Barnes, Dodionne Watson sought a court order addressing his detention through a habeas petition. The order does not explain the petition’s underlying claims.
No one objected to the magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation. Judge Wright therefore reviewed it for clear error and found none.
Judge Wilhelmina M. Wright adopted the recommendation, denied Watson’s petition, and dismissed the action without prejudice, allowing it to be filed again as permitted by law.
The detailed version
- Watson v. Barnes · No. 0:18-cv-01295
- Wilhelmina Wright
- Aug. 29, 2018
Background
Dodionne Watson filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus against Warden Barnes. The order refers to a June 22, 2018 Report and Recommendation by United States Magistrate Judge Tony N. Leung, but it does not describe the petition’s claims or the recommendation’s reasoning.
Court’s Review
No objections were filed to the Report and Recommendation. Under the stated standard, the district court reviewed the recommendation for clear error, meaning an obvious mistake in the magistrate judge’s analysis. The court found no clear error.
Ruling
Judge Wilhelmina M. Wright ordered that the Report and Recommendation be adopted. The court denied Watson’s habeas petition and dismissed the action without prejudice. The order does not state the grounds for denying the petition or otherwise analyze the underlying habeas claims.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.