Curtis v. United States
- Wilhelmina Wright
- 0:20-cv-01202
- U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
- 2
In Curtis v. United States, Judge Wright adopted a recommendation, denied Curtis’s petition, and dismissed the matter without prejudice.
David Kevin Curtis’s petition was denied, and the matter was dismissed without prejudice; the United States remained the respondent.
What happened
In Curtis v. United States, David Kevin Curtis filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus against the United States. A magistrate judge recommended denying the petition.
Curtis did not file objections within the allowed time. The district court therefore reviewed the recommendation for clear error and found none.
Judge Wilhelmina M. Wright adopted the recommendation, denied Curtis’s petition, and dismissed the matter without prejudice.
The detailed version
- Curtis v. United States · No. 0:20-cv-01202
- Wilhelmina Wright
- June 30, 2020
Background
David Kevin Curtis petitioned for a writ of habeas corpus, a court proceeding that challenges a person’s custody or detention. United States Magistrate Judge Hildy Bowbeer issued a May 19, 2020 Report and Recommendation recommending that the petition be denied.
Review
Curtis did not file objections within the permitted period. When no timely objections are filed, the district court reviews the recommendation for clear error, meaning an obvious mistake in the record. Judge Wilhelmina M. Wright stated that the court had conducted that review and found no clear error.
Ruling
The court adopted the Report and Recommendation, denied Curtis’s petition, and dismissed the matter without prejudice. The opinion does not explain the underlying basis for denying the petition because it adopts the recommendation after clear-error review.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.