Woodyard v. Eischen
Woodyard v. Eischen
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA
Case No. 25-cv-1297 (LMP/DLM) BLAKE WOODYARD, Petitioner, ORDER ADOPTING v. REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION B. EISCHEN and FPC DULUTH, Respondents.
Before the Court is the Report and Recommendation (“R&R”), ECF No. 5, of United States Magistrate Judge Douglas L. Micko, which recommends denying Petitioner Blake Woodyard’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus, ECF No. 1. No objections have been filed to the R&R in the time period permitted, and it is therefore reviewed 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 of the files, records, and proceedings in the above-captioned matter, IT IS ORDERED THAT: 1. The R&R (ECF No. 5) is ADOPTED; 2. Mr. Woodyard’s Petition (ECF No. 1) is DENIED.1 LET JUDGMENT BE ENTERED ACCORDINGLY.
Dated: June 30, 2025 s/Laura M. Provinzino Laura M. Provinzino United States District Judge
1 Mr. Woodyard asked in his habeas petition that the Court direct the BOP to transfer him to a facility that offers RDAP, which the Court cannot do. But the Court notes that, according to the BOP Inmate Locator, Mr. Woodyard is now at FCI-Lewisburg, which offers the RDAP Program. Bureau of Prisons, Residential Drug Abuse Programs (RDAP) and Locations, https://perma.cc/TH5X-AA3X.
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA
Case No. 25-cv-1297 (LMP/DLM) BLAKE WOODYARD, Petitioner, ORDER ADOPTING v. REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION B. EISCHEN and FPC DULUTH, Respondents.
Before the Court is the Report and Recommendation (“R&R”), ECF No. 5, of United States Magistrate Judge Douglas L. Micko, which recommends denying Petitioner Blake Woodyard’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus, ECF No. 1. No objections have been filed to the R&R in the time period permitted, and it is therefore reviewed 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 of the files, records, and proceedings in the above-captioned matter, IT IS ORDERED THAT: 1. The R&R (ECF No. 5) is ADOPTED; 2. Mr. Woodyard’s Petition (ECF No. 1) is DENIED.1 LET JUDGMENT BE ENTERED ACCORDINGLY.
Dated: June 30, 2025 s/Laura M. Provinzino Laura M. Provinzino United States District Judge
1 Mr. Woodyard asked in his habeas petition that the Court direct the BOP to transfer him to a facility that offers RDAP, which the Court cannot do. But the Court notes that, according to the BOP Inmate Locator, Mr. Woodyard is now at FCI-Lewisburg, which offers the RDAP Program. Bureau of Prisons, Residential Drug Abuse Programs (RDAP) and Locations, https://perma.cc/TH5X-AA3X.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.