Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
D. Minn.Procedural orderFiled Nov. 20, 2018

Morganfield v. Rios

Judge
Wilhelmina Wright
Docket
0:17-cv-00304
Court
U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
Pages
1
HabeasCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Morganfield v. Rios, Judge Wright denied Morganfield’s detention challenge and dismissed the action without prejudice after adopting a magistrate judge’s recommendation.

Who this affects

Anthony Morganfield’s petition was denied and his action was dismissed without prejudice; Warden M. Rios and the Federal Bureau of Prisons were the respondents.

What happened

In Morganfield v. Rios, Anthony Morganfield filed a petition under a federal law allowing challenges to custody. The magistrate judge recommended resolving the petition, but the opinion does not state the recommendation’s reasoning.

No objections were filed, so the court reviewed the recommendation for clear error. It found no clear error, adopted the recommendation, denied Morganfield’s petition, and dismissed the action without prejudice.

Judge Wilhelmina M. Wright entered the order on November 20, 2018. The order does not explain the underlying basis for denying the petition beyond adopting the recommendation.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Morganfield v. Rios · No. 0:17-cv-00304
Judge
Wilhelmina Wright
Date
Nov. 20, 2018

Background

Anthony Morganfield filed a petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. The respondents were Warden M. Rios and the Federal Bureau of Prisons. Magistrate Judge Franklin L. Noel issued a Report and Recommendation on August 28, 2018.

Review of the Recommendation

No objections were filed to the Report and Recommendation. Under the applicable rule, Judge Wright therefore reviewed it for clear error, meaning an obvious mistake. The court found no clear error.

Ruling

The court adopted the Report and Recommendation, denied Morganfield’s petition, and dismissed the action without prejudice. The opinion does not provide the Report and Recommendation’s reasoning or explain the underlying basis for denying the petition.

The authoritative version

Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.