Stewart v. Beltz
- Wilhelmina Wright
- 0:19-cv-02638
- U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
- 1
In Stewart v. Beltz, Judge Wright adopted the recommendation, granted Beltz’s dismissal motion, denied Stewart’s petition, and dismissed the case with prejudice.
Matthew Scott Stewart’s habeas petition was denied, and the matter was dismissed with prejudice. Tracy Beltz’s motion to dismiss was granted.
What happened
In Stewart v. Beltz, Matthew Scott Stewart asked for a court order addressing his habeas petition. The opinion does not describe the petition’s underlying claims or the reasons for dismissal.
No one objected to the magistrate judge’s recommendation. The court therefore reviewed it for clear error and found none.
Judge Wright adopted the recommendation, granted Tracy Beltz’s motion to dismiss, denied Stewart’s petition, dismissed the matter with prejudice, and declined to issue a certificate of appealability.
The detailed version
- Stewart v. Beltz · No. 0:19-cv-02638
- Wilhelmina Wright
- July 22, 2020
Background
Matthew Scott Stewart was the petitioner, and Tracy Beltz, identified in the caption as warden, was the respondent. The court considered a March 5, 2020 report and recommendation from United States Magistrate Judge Tony N. Leung. The opinion does not include the recommendation’s reasoning or describe the underlying claims in Stewart’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus.
Court’s Review
No objections to the report and recommendation were filed. The court therefore reviewed it for clear error, meaning an obvious mistake apparent from the record. After reviewing the recommendation and the case materials, the court found no clear error.
Ruling
The court adopted the March 5, 2020 report and recommendation. It granted the respondent’s motion to dismiss, denied Stewart’s habeas petition, and dismissed the matter with prejudice, meaning the dismissal bars refiling the matter. The court also ordered that no certificate of appealability would issue and directed that judgment be entered.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.