Politano v. Jansen
- Wilhelmina Wright
- 0:20-cv-00012
- U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
- 2
Politano v. Jansen: Judge Wright denied Politano’s habeas petition, denied his fee-waiver application as moot, and dismissed the matter with prejudice.
Christopher Robert Politano’s habeas petition was denied, his application to proceed without paying filing fees was denied as moot, and the matter was dismissed with prejudice. No certificate of appealability will issue.
What happened
In Politano v. Jansen, Christopher Robert Politano asked the federal court for habeas relief. A magistrate judge recommended denying the petition, and no timely objections were filed.
Because there were no timely objections, the court reviewed the recommendation for clear error. It found no clear error and adopted the recommendation.
Judge Wilhelmina M. Wright denied the habeas petition, denied Politano’s application to proceed without paying filing fees as moot, and dismissed the matter with prejudice. The court also said that no certificate allowing an appeal would issue.
The detailed version
- Politano v. Jansen · No. 0:20-cv-00012
- Wilhelmina Wright
- June 17, 2020
Background
Christopher Robert Politano filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus against Warden Vikkie Jansen. The opinion does not describe the underlying grounds for the petition. United States Magistrate Judge Leo I. Brisbois issued a March 12, 2020 Report and Recommendation recommending that the petition be denied. Politano also applied to proceed in forma pauperis, meaning without paying the required filing fees.
Review of the Recommendation
No timely objections to the Report and Recommendation were filed. The district court therefore reviewed it for clear error, meaning an obvious mistake on the face of the record. The court found no clear error and adopted the recommendation.
Disposition
The court ordered that:
- The March 12, 2020 Report and Recommendation was adopted. - Politano’s habeas petition was denied. - His application to proceed in forma pauperis was denied as moot. - No certificate of appealability would issue under 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2). - The matter was dismissed with prejudice.
The opinion does not explain the substantive basis for denying the habeas petition; the ruling followed the court’s clear-error review and adoption of the Report and Recommendation.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.