Jenkins v. Barnes
Jenkins v. Barnes
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA
Lori Jenkins, Case No. 18-cv-1425 (WMW/ECW) Petitioner, v. ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND Warden Barnes, RECOMMENDATION Respondent.
This matter is before the Court on the October 1, 2018 Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Elizabeth Cowan Wright. (Dkt. 6.) Because no objections have been filed, this Court reviews the Report and Recommendation for clear error. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b); Grinder v. Gammon, 73 F.3d 793, 795 (8th Cir. 1996) (per curiam). Having reviewed the Report and Recommendation, the Court finds no clear error.1 Based on the Report and Recommendation and all the files, records, and proceedings herein, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED: 1. The October 1, 2018 Report and Recommendation, (Dkt. 6), is ADOPTED; and 2. This action is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for lack of subject- matter jurisdiction.
Dated: October 31, 2018 s/Wilhelmina M. Wright Wilhelmina M. Wright United States District Judge The Court is mindful that Jenkins challenges the application of United States Sentencing Guidelines § 2K2.1(c)(1)(B), not § 2K1.1(c)(1)(B). The Report and Recommendation’s substantive review and analysis, however, is legally sound.
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA
Lori Jenkins, Case No. 18-cv-1425 (WMW/ECW) Petitioner, v. ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND Warden Barnes, RECOMMENDATION Respondent.
This matter is before the Court on the October 1, 2018 Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Elizabeth Cowan Wright. (Dkt. 6.) Because no objections have been filed, this Court reviews the Report and Recommendation for clear error. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b); Grinder v. Gammon, 73 F.3d 793, 795 (8th Cir. 1996) (per curiam). Having reviewed the Report and Recommendation, the Court finds no clear error.1 Based on the Report and Recommendation and all the files, records, and proceedings herein, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED: 1. The October 1, 2018 Report and Recommendation, (Dkt. 6), is ADOPTED; and 2. This action is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for lack of subject- matter jurisdiction.
Dated: October 31, 2018 s/Wilhelmina M. Wright Wilhelmina M. Wright United States District Judge The Court is mindful that Jenkins challenges the application of United States Sentencing Guidelines § 2K2.1(c)(1)(B), not § 2K1.1(c)(1)(B). The Report and Recommendation’s substantive review and analysis, however, is legally sound.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.