Padilla v. Segal

U.S. District Court, District of Minnesota

Padilla v. Segal

Trial Court Opinion

                 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT                            
                    DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA                                

Darlene Lluvia Padilla,                  Civ. No. 23-1596 (PAM/JFD)      

                    Petitioner,                                          

v.                                   MEMORANDUM AND ORDER                

Michael Segal, Warden,                                                   

                    Respondent.                                          

    This matter is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) of 
United States Magistrate Judge John F. Docherty dated December 11, 2023.  (Docket No. 
15.)  The R&R recommends that Petitioner Darlene Lluvia Padilla’s Petition for a Writ of 
Habeas Corpus be denied because the Petition conclusively shows that Padilla is not 
entitled to habeas relief.  Padilla did not file any objections to the R&R and the time to do 
so has passed.  D. Minn. L.R. 72.2(b)(1).                                 
    This Court must review de novo any portion of an R&R to which specific objections 
are made, but in the absence of objections, the Court reviews the R&R only for clear error.  
28 U.S.C. § 636
(b)(1); D. Minn. L.R. 72.2(b); see also Grinder v. Gammon, 
73 F.3d 793, 795
 (8th Cir. 1996) (noting that district court need only review un-objected-to R&R for 
clear error).  The Court has reviewed the R&R and finds no error, clear or otherwise, in the 
Magistrate Judge’s reasoning.                                             
    Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:                              
    1.   The R&R (Docket No. 15) is ADOPTED;                             
    2.   The Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus (Docket No. 1) is DENIED; and  
    3.   This matter is DISMISSED.                                       
LET JUDGMENT BE ENTERED ACCORDINGLY.                                      

Dated:      January 10, 2024              s/Paul A. Magnuson              
                             Paul A. Magnuson                            
                             United States District Court Judge          

Trial Court Opinion

                 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT                            
                    DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA                                

Darlene Lluvia Padilla,                  Civ. No. 23-1596 (PAM/JFD)      

                    Petitioner,                                          

v.                                   MEMORANDUM AND ORDER                

Michael Segal, Warden,                                                   

                    Respondent.                                          

    This matter is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) of 
United States Magistrate Judge John F. Docherty dated December 11, 2023.  (Docket No. 
15.)  The R&R recommends that Petitioner Darlene Lluvia Padilla’s Petition for a Writ of 
Habeas Corpus be denied because the Petition conclusively shows that Padilla is not 
entitled to habeas relief.  Padilla did not file any objections to the R&R and the time to do 
so has passed.  D. Minn. L.R. 72.2(b)(1).                                 
    This Court must review de novo any portion of an R&R to which specific objections 
are made, but in the absence of objections, the Court reviews the R&R only for clear error.  
28 U.S.C. § 636
(b)(1); D. Minn. L.R. 72.2(b); see also Grinder v. Gammon, 
73 F.3d 793, 795
 (8th Cir. 1996) (noting that district court need only review un-objected-to R&R for 
clear error).  The Court has reviewed the R&R and finds no error, clear or otherwise, in the 
Magistrate Judge’s reasoning.                                             
    Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:                              
    1.   The R&R (Docket No. 15) is ADOPTED;                             
    2.   The Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus (Docket No. 1) is DENIED; and  
    3.   This matter is DISMISSED.                                       
LET JUDGMENT BE ENTERED ACCORDINGLY.                                      

Dated:      January 10, 2024              s/Paul A. Magnuson              
                             Paul A. Magnuson                            
                             United States District Court Judge          

Reference

Status
Unknown