Justin M. Schiffer v. Brown County Jail

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN

JUSTIN M SCHIFFER, Petitioner, v. Case No. 26-cv-0388-bhl BROWN COUNTY JAIL, Respondent. ______________________________________________________________________________ ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION ______________________________________________________________________________ On March 10, 2026, Petitioner Justin M. Schiffer, filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §2241 and a motion to proceed without prepayment of the filing fee, or in forma pauperis (IFP). (ECF Nos. 1 & 2.) At the time Schiffer filed his petition, he was a pretrial detainee at the Brown County Jail, but he is now incarcerated at the Dodge Correctional Institution, following the state’s revocation of his probation. (ECF No. 1 at 2; ECF No. 7.) On April 20, 2026, Magistrate Judge Stephen C. Dries screened the petition and issued a Report and Recommendation suggesting that the case be dismissed, a certificate of appealability denied, and the motion to proceed IFP be denied as moot. (ECF No. 8.) The case was reassigned to a District Judge to adopt, reject, or modify the Report and Recommendation. 28 U.S.C. §636(b)(1)(C).

Judge Dries explained that Schiffer’s application must be dismissed for two reasons: (1) Schiffer seeks dismissal of his state-court charges outright, relief the Court cannot provide under Section 2241, and (2) Schiffer’s guilty plea required him to waive alleged constitutional violations. (ECF No. 8 at 2 (citing Washington v. Smith, 564 F.3d 1350, 1350–51 (7th Cir. 2009); State v. Lasky, 646 N.W.2d 53, 57 (Wis. Ct. App. 2002)).) On the second issue, Judge Dries explained that if Schiffer believes his lawyer lied to him and forced him to take the plea deal, Schiffer must first raise that claim in his state-court proceedings. (Id. at 2–3 (citing Cole v. Beck, 765 F.App’x 137, 139 (7th Cir. 2019)).)

Pursuant to General Local Rule 72(c), 28 U.S.C. §636(b)(1)(B) and (C), and Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 6(d) and 72(b)(2), Schiffer had until May 4, 2026 to file and serve written objections to Judge Dries’s Report and Recommendation. Schiffer has not filed any objections.

Accordingly, the Court’s review is limited, and the Report and Recommendation will only be rejected or modified if it is “clearly erroneous or contrary to law.” 28 U.S.C. §636(b)(1)(A). The record and relevant law support Judge Dries’s recommendation.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Magistrate Judge Dries’s Report and Recommendation, ECF No. 8, are ADOPTED.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner Justin Schiffer’s application for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §2241, ECF No. 1, is DISMISSED. The Clerk is instructed to enter judgment accordingly.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a certificate of appealability is DENIED. The Court does not find that reasonable jurists could debate that Petitioner has made a substantial showing that the petition should have been resolved in a different manner. See Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000). The Clerk of Court is directed to enter judgment accordingly.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner’s motion for leave to proceed without prepayment of the filing fee, ECF No. 2, is DENIED as moot.

Dated at Milwaukee, Wisconsin on May 20, 2026. s/ Brett H. Ludwig BRETT H. LUDWIG United States District Judge