Morrow v. Eischen
Morrow v. Eischen
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA
Dale Dexter Morrow, Jr., Case No. 23-CV-2137 (JMB/DTS) Petitioner,
ORDER ON REPORT AND v. RECOMMENDATION
B. Eischen, FPC-Duluth Warden, Respondent.
This matter is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation (R&R) of United States Magistrate Judge David T. Schultz dated April 8, 2024. (Doc. No. 21.) The R&R recommends that Petitioner Dale Dexter Morrow’s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (Doc. No. 1) be denied as moot and that his request for additional time in a Residential Reentry Center (RRC) (Doc. No. 1-1) also be denied. (See Doc. No. 21.) Morrow did not file any objections to the R&R, and the time to do so has now passed. See D. Minn. L.R. 72.2(b)(1).
In the absence of timely objections, the Court reviews the R&R for clear error. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b); Grinder v. Gammon, 73 F.3d 793, 795 (8th Cir. 1996) (per curiam).
Finding no clear error, and based upon all the files, records, and proceedings in the above- captioned matter, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT: 1. The R&R (Doc. No. 21) is ADOPTED; 2. Petitioner’s Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. No. 1) is DENIED AS MOOT; 3. Petitioner’s request for additional time in an RRC (Doc. No. 1-1) is DENIED; and 4. This matter is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.
LET JUDGMENT BE ENTERED ACCORDINGLY.
Dated: May 1, 2024 /s/ Jeffrey M. Bryan Judge Jeffrey M. Bryan United States District Court
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA
Dale Dexter Morrow, Jr., Case No. 23-CV-2137 (JMB/DTS) Petitioner,
ORDER ON REPORT AND v. RECOMMENDATION
B. Eischen, FPC-Duluth Warden, Respondent.
This matter is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation (R&R) of United States Magistrate Judge David T. Schultz dated April 8, 2024. (Doc. No. 21.) The R&R recommends that Petitioner Dale Dexter Morrow’s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (Doc. No. 1) be denied as moot and that his request for additional time in a Residential Reentry Center (RRC) (Doc. No. 1-1) also be denied. (See Doc. No. 21.) Morrow did not file any objections to the R&R, and the time to do so has now passed. See D. Minn. L.R. 72.2(b)(1).
In the absence of timely objections, the Court reviews the R&R for clear error. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b); Grinder v. Gammon, 73 F.3d 793, 795 (8th Cir. 1996) (per curiam).
Finding no clear error, and based upon all the files, records, and proceedings in the above- captioned matter, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT: 1. The R&R (Doc. No. 21) is ADOPTED; 2. Petitioner’s Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. No. 1) is DENIED AS MOOT; 3. Petitioner’s request for additional time in an RRC (Doc. No. 1-1) is DENIED; and 4. This matter is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.
LET JUDGMENT BE ENTERED ACCORDINGLY.
Dated: May 1, 2024 /s/ Jeffrey M. Bryan Judge Jeffrey M. Bryan United States District Court
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.