McField v. Eischen
- Jerry Blackwell
- 0:22-cv-01362
- U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
- 2
In McField v. Eischen, Judge Blackwell denied Jimmy McField’s federal custody petition with prejudice after finding no clear error in the magistrate judge’s recommendation.
Jimmy McField’s petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 was denied with prejudice, resulting in final judgment against the petition.
What happened
Jimmy McField petitioned for a writ of habeas corpus under federal law against Warden Eischen. The order addressed a magistrate judge’s recommendation concerning that petition.
Magistrate Judge Dulce J. Foster issued the recommendation on January 5, 2024. No objections were filed, so the district court reviewed the recommendation for clear error and found none.
Judge Jerry W. Blackwell accepted the recommendation but removed language that had recommended dismissal without prejudice. The court denied McField’s petition with prejudice, stating that the denial was on the merits and directing entry of final judgment.
The detailed version
- McField v. Eischen · No. 0:22-cv-01362
- Jerry W. Blackwell
- Feb. 22, 2024
Background
Jimmy McField filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. Warden Eischen was the respondent. United States Magistrate Judge Dulce J. Foster issued a Report and Recommendation on January 5, 2024.
Review of the Recommendation
No objections were filed within the permitted time. Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b), the district court therefore reviewed the Report and Recommendation for clear error. The court found no clear error.
Ruling
The court accepted the January 5, 2024 Report and Recommendation as modified to remove language recommending dismissal without prejudice. It denied McField’s § 2241 petition with prejudice. The order explains that denial on the merits operates as a final judgment and directed that judgment be entered accordingly.
The order does not describe the underlying custody issue or explain the merits analysis beyond stating that the petition was denied on the merits.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.