Hall Approved Free Access to American Case Law
U.S. District Court, District of Minnesota, 2024

Glover v. State of Minnesota

Glover v. State of Minnesota
U.S. District Court, District of Minnesota · Decided August 21, 2024

Glover v. State of Minnesota

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA

Andrew Glover, Case No. 24-CV-1125 (KMM/DJF) Petitioner, v. ORDER State of Minnesota, Respondent.

The above matter comes before the Court upon the Report and Recommendation (R&R) of United States Magistrate Dulce J. Foster, dated June 14, 2024. No objections have been filed to that R&R in the time period permitted.

The Court reviews de novo any portion of the R&R to which specific objections are made. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); D. Minn. LR 72.2(b). In the absence of objections, the Court reviews the R&R for clear error. Nur v. Olmsted County, 563 F.

Supp. 3d 946, 949 (D. Minn. 2021) (citing Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b) and Grinder v. Gammon, 73 F.3d 793, 795 (8th Cir. 1996) (per curiam)). Based on the Court's careful review of the R&R and the record in this case, the Magistrate Judge committed no error, clear or otherwise, and the R&R is accepted in full.

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. Mr. Glover’s Petition Under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 for a Writ of Habeas Corpus by a Person in State Custody (ECF 1) is DENIED; 2. Mr. Glover’s Application to Proceed in District Court Without Prepaying Fees or Costs (ECF 2) is DENIED as moot; 3. This matter is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

Let Judgment Be Entered Accordingly.

Date: August 20, 2024 s/ Katherine M. Menendez Katherine M. Menendez United States District Judge

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA

Andrew Glover, Case No. 24-CV-1125 (KMM/DJF) Petitioner, v. ORDER State of Minnesota, Respondent.

The above matter comes before the Court upon the Report and Recommendation (R&R) of United States Magistrate Dulce J. Foster, dated June 14, 2024. No objections have been filed to that R&R in the time period permitted.

The Court reviews de novo any portion of the R&R to which specific objections are made. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); D. Minn. LR 72.2(b). In the absence of objections, the Court reviews the R&R for clear error. Nur v. Olmsted County, 563 F.

Supp. 3d 946, 949 (D. Minn. 2021) (citing Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b) and Grinder v. Gammon, 73 F.3d 793, 795 (8th Cir. 1996) (per curiam)). Based on the Court's careful review of the R&R and the record in this case, the Magistrate Judge committed no error, clear or otherwise, and the R&R is accepted in full.

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. Mr. Glover’s Petition Under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 for a Writ of Habeas Corpus by a Person in State Custody (ECF 1) is DENIED; 2. Mr. Glover’s Application to Proceed in District Court Without Prepaying Fees or Costs (ECF 2) is DENIED as moot; 3. This matter is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

Let Judgment Be Entered Accordingly.

Date: August 20, 2024 s/ Katherine M. Menendez Katherine M. Menendez United States District Judge

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.

↑