Hill v. State of Minnesota
- Michael Davis
- 0:22-cv-03101
- U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
- 2
In Hill v. State of Minnesota, Judge Davis adopted the recommendation, denied Hill’s petition and fee application, and dismissed the case without prejudice.
Jason Robert Hill’s habeas petition and application to proceed without paying filing fees were denied, and his case was dismissed without prejudice. The State of Minnesota remained the respondent.
What happened
In Hill v. State of Minnesota, Jason Robert Hill, representing himself, asked for a writ of habeas corpus. The opinion does not explain the grounds for his petition.
A magistrate judge recommended denying the petition, dismissing the case, denying Hill’s application to proceed without paying filing fees, and refusing to issue a certificate of appealability. Hill did not object within the permitted period, so the court reviewed the recommendation for clear error and found none.
Judge Michael J. Davis adopted the recommendation. The court dismissed the case without prejudice, denied the habeas petition, denied the application to proceed without paying filing fees, and did not issue a certificate of appealability.
The detailed version
- Hill v. State of Minnesota · No. 0:22-cv-03101
- Michael Davis
- Apr. 5, 2023
Background
Jason Robert Hill filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus. The opinion identifies Hill as representing himself. It does not describe the legal or factual grounds for the petition.
Report and Recommendation
United States Magistrate Judge David T. Schultz issued a January 5, 2023 Report and Recommendation. It recommended denying Hill’s petition and dismissing the case. It also recommended denying Hill’s application to proceed without paying filing fees and declining to issue a Certificate of Appealability, which is a document required for certain appeals in habeas cases.
Court’s Review and Ruling
No timely objections were filed. The court therefore reviewed the Report and Recommendation for clear error, meaning an obvious mistake on the face of the record. The court found no clear error and adopted the recommendation.
The court ordered that:
- The January 5, 2023 Report and Recommendation was adopted. - The case was dismissed without prejudice. - Hill’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus was denied. - Hill’s application to proceed without paying filing fees was denied. - A Certificate of Appealability was not issued.
The opinion does not state why the petition was denied or identify the underlying issue Hill raised.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.