Padilla v. Segal
- Paul Magnuson
- 0:23-cv-01596
- U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
- 2
In Padilla v. Segal, Judge Magnuson adopted the recommendation, denied Padilla’s habeas petition, and dismissed the matter.
Darlene Lluvia Padilla, whose habeas petition was denied and matter dismissed; Michael Segal, identified as the respondent.
What happened
Darlene Lluvia Padilla asked the federal court to grant her a petition challenging her custody. A magistrate judge recommended denying the petition because it showed that Padilla was not entitled to relief.
Padilla did not object to the recommendation before the deadline. The district court therefore reviewed it for clear error and found none.
In Padilla v. Segal, Judge Paul A. Magnuson adopted the recommendation, denied the habeas petition, and dismissed the matter.
The detailed version
- Padilla v. Segal · No. 0:23-cv-01596
- Paul Magnuson
- Jan. 11, 2024
Background
Darlene Lluvia Padilla filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus against Michael Segal, identified in the opinion as a warden. United States Magistrate Judge John F. Docherty issued a Report and Recommendation on December 11, 2023, recommending that the petition be denied because it conclusively showed that Padilla was not entitled to habeas relief.
Padilla did not file objections, and the deadline for doing so had passed. When no specific objections are filed, the district court reviews the recommendation for clear error rather than conducting a full reconsideration of the issues.
Ruling
The court reviewed the recommendation and found no error, clear or otherwise, in the magistrate judge’s reasoning. Judge Paul A. Magnuson ordered that the Report and Recommendation be adopted, the petition for a writ of habeas corpus be denied, and the matter be dismissed. The opinion does not explain the underlying basis for Padilla’s habeas petition or provide a separate merits analysis.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.