Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
D. Minn.Procedural orderFiled Mar. 23, 2020

Hewlett v. Kallis

Judge
Wilhelmina Wright
Docket
0:19-cv-01123
Court
U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
Pages
1
HabeasCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Hewlett v. Kallis, Judge Wright adopted the recommendation, denied Hewlett’s habeas petition, and dismissed the action with prejudice.

Who this affects

Auzio Hewlett’s habeas petition was denied, and his action against Warden Kallis was dismissed with prejudice.

What happened

In Hewlett v. Kallis, the court reviewed a magistrate judge’s recommendation concerning Auzio Hewlett’s petition asking for habeas relief. No one filed objections to the recommendation.

The court found no clear error and denied Hewlett’s petition. It also dismissed the action with prejudice, meaning the case was closed and could not be refiled in the same form.

Judge Wilhelmina M. Wright entered the order on March 23, 2020. The order does not explain the recommendation’s underlying reasoning.

The detailed version

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

Case
Hewlett v. Kallis · No. 0:19-cv-01123
Judge
Wilhelmina Wright
Date
Mar. 23, 2020

Background

Auzio Hewlett filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus against Warden Kallis. The opinion concerns a January 7, 2020 Report and Recommendation issued by United States Magistrate Judge Leo I. Brisbois. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims or the recommendation’s reasoning.

Court’s Review

No objections were filed. Under the stated procedure, the district court reviewed the recommendation for clear error, meaning an obvious mistake in the recommendation. The court reviewed the recommendation and found no clear error.

Ruling

Judge Wilhelmina M. Wright ordered that Hewlett’s habeas petition be denied. The court also ordered that the action be dismissed with prejudice and directed that judgment be entered. Because the opinion only adopts the recommendation after clear-error review and does not discuss the underlying habeas issue, the opinion does not itself show whether the petition was rejected on the merits or on a threshold ground.

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.