U.S. District Court, District of Minnesota, 2025

Garrett v. Eischen

Garrett v. Eischen
U.S. District Court, District of Minnesota · Decided June 18, 2025
Garrett v. Eischen

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA

Detonya Garrett, Case No. 25-CV-02128 (JMB/LIB) Petitioner,

ORDER v. Bill Eischen, Federal Prison Camp (FPC) Duluth Warden or Current Acting Warden, Respondent.

This matter is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation (R&R) of United States Magistrate Judge Leo I. Brisbois dated May 22, 2025. (Doc. No. 4.) The R&R recommends that the Court deny Petitioner Detonya Garrett’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus and dismiss this action. (See id. at 4.) Garrett has not objected 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. 4) is ADOPTED.

2. Petitioner Detonya Garrett’s Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. No. 1) is DENIED.

3. This action is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.

LET JUDGMENT BE ENTERED ACCORDINGLY.

Dated: June 18, 2025 s/Jeffrey M. Bryan Judge Jeffrey M. Bryan United States District Court

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA

Detonya Garrett, Case No. 25-CV-02128 (JMB/LIB) Petitioner,

ORDER v. Bill Eischen, Federal Prison Camp (FPC) Duluth Warden or Current Acting Warden, Respondent.

This matter is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation (R&R) of United States Magistrate Judge Leo I. Brisbois dated May 22, 2025. (Doc. No. 4.) The R&R recommends that the Court deny Petitioner Detonya Garrett’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus and dismiss this action. (See id. at 4.) Garrett has not objected 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. 4) is ADOPTED.

2. Petitioner Detonya Garrett’s Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. No. 1) is DENIED.

3. This action is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.

LET JUDGMENT BE ENTERED ACCORDINGLY.

Dated: June 18, 2025 s/Jeffrey M. Bryan Judge Jeffrey M. Bryan United States District Court

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