Lara v. Rardin
- Jerry Blackwell
- 0:22-cv-02285
- U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
- 3
In Lara v. Rardin, Judge Blackwell adopted the recommendation, denied Lara’s habeas petition, denied his status motion as moot, and dismissed the action without prejudice.
Enrique Lara’s § 2241 petition was denied, his status motion was denied as moot, and the action was dismissed without prejudice. The respondents were identified as Jarid Rardin, Warden, and Federal Medical Center.
What happened
In Lara v. Rardin, Enrique Lara objected to a magistrate judge’s recommendation that his petition under a federal detention-review law be denied without prejudice. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims or the reason for the recommendation.
The court reviewed the challenged portions of the recommendation independently and reviewed the rest for clear error. It found no legal or factual error, accepted the recommendation in full, overruled Lara’s objections, denied his petition, and denied his motion requesting a status update as moot.
Judge Jerry W. Blackwell ordered that the action be dismissed without prejudice, meaning the dismissal did not bar refiling. The order entered judgment accordingly.
The detailed version
- Lara v. Rardin · No. 0:22-cv-02285
- Jerry W. Blackwell
- Sept. 26, 2023
Background
Enrique Lara, who represented himself, filed a petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. The opinion does not explain the petition’s underlying allegations or the relief Lara requested. United States Magistrate Judge Leo I. Brisbois issued a Report and Recommendation on July 10, 2023, recommending that the petition be denied without prejudice. Lara objected to that recommendation. He also filed a motion requesting a status update regarding his petition.
Court’s review
The district court reviewed the portions of the recommendation challenged by Lara independently, as required for specific objections. It reviewed the portions not specifically challenged for clear error, meaning an obvious mistake in the record or law. Because Lara was representing himself, the court interpreted his objections liberally.
The court concluded that Lara’s objections did not identify a legal or factual error requiring rejection of the recommendation. After reviewing the remaining portions, the court found no clear error or conflict with the law and accepted the recommendation in its entirety. The opinion does not provide a merits analysis of the underlying § 2241 petition.
Disposition
Judge Jerry W. Blackwell ordered that Lara’s objections be overruled, the Report and Recommendation be accepted, and Lara’s § 2241 petition be denied. The court denied Lara’s status motion as moot, meaning the court found no need to decide it because of the other ruling. The court also dismissed the action without prejudice and directed that judgment be entered.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.