Hogquist v. Anoka County District Courts

Background

Michelle Lyn Hogquist filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus against Anoka County District Courts, the City of Anoka Police Department, the State of Minnesota, and the Attorney General. The opinion does not describe the factual basis of the petition or the underlying claim.

Report and Recommendation

United States Magistrate Judge Katherine M. Menendez issued a Report and Recommendation (R&R) on October 24, 2019. The R&R recommended denying Hogquist’s petition. Hogquist did not file timely objections. The Clerk mailed the R&R to Hogquist’s last known address, but the Postal Service returned it as undeliverable. The court declined to delay its decision because Hogquist had not provided another address.

When no timely objection is filed, the district court reviews an R&R for clear error, meaning an obvious mistake on the face of the record. Judge Wright stated that she found no clear error and adopted the R&R. The order does not provide the R&R’s reasoning or otherwise analyze the petition’s underlying legal question.

Disposition

The court ordered the following:

- The October 24, 2019 R&R was adopted. - Hogquist’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus was denied. - Her application to proceed in forma pauperis, meaning without paying the case’s filing fees, was denied as moot. - No certificate of appealability would issue. - The matter was dismissed without prejudice, meaning the order did not bar a later filing based solely on that dismissal language.

Judge Wilhelmina M. Wright directed that judgment be entered. Because the court adopted the R&R after clear-error review without addressing the petition’s underlying merits in this order, this is a procedural disposition.