Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
D. Minn.Procedural orderFiled July 13, 2022

Alcazar v. Eischen

Judge
Wilhelmina Wright
Docket
0:22-cv-01330
Court
U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
Pages
1
HabeasCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Alcazar v. Eischen, Judge Wright adopted the recommendation and dismissed Alcazar’s habeas petition without prejudice after finding no clear error.

Who this affects

Everardo Alcazar, Jr.; the petition was dismissed without prejudice, while B. Eischen was the respondent.

What happened

Everardo Alcazar, Jr. filed a petition asking for habeas relief from B. Eischen. The court considered a magistrate judge’s recommendation and noted that no one had objected.

Because there were no timely objections, the court reviewed the recommendation for clear error. It found none.

In Alcazar v. Eischen, Judge Wilhelmina M. Wright adopted the recommendation and dismissed Alcazar’s habeas petition without prejudice. The opinion does not explain the underlying reason for dismissal.

The detailed version

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

Case
Alcazar v. Eischen · No. 0:22-cv-01330
Judge
Wilhelmina Wright
Date
July 13, 2022

Background

Everardo Alcazar, Jr. filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus. The court considered a June 8, 2022 report and recommendation issued by United States Magistrate Judge Leo I. Brisbois.

Court’s Review

No objections to the report and recommendation were filed. Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b), the district court therefore reviewed the recommendation for clear error. The court stated that, after reviewing the recommendation and the case record, it found no clear error.

Ruling

Judge Wilhelmina M. Wright ordered that the June 8, 2022 report and recommendation be adopted. The court dismissed Alcazar’s habeas petition without prejudice, meaning the opinion did not bar refiling based on that disposition. The opinion does not state the underlying reason for the dismissal.

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.