Brown v. Rios
||December 30, 2008
||US District Court for the District of Minnesota
||XX US, Outside State
|Nature of Suit:
||Habeas Corpus (General)
|Cause of Action:
||28:2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
|Jury Demanded By:
Access additional case information on PACER
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
|March 17, 2009
ORDER STATING: (1) Petitioner's "traverse response" 6 is construed as a Motion to Amend and is denied; (2) the Magistrate's Report and Recommendation 5 is adopted; (3) the Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis 2 is d enied; (4) the Complaint is summarily dismissed; (5) Petitioner is required to pay the unpaid balance of the filing fee ($346.80); and (6) this action is dismissed on the grounds that it is frivolous, malicious, or fails to state a claim on which relief can be granted pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 1915(g). LET JUDGMENT BE ENTERED ACCORDINGLY (Written Opinion). Signed by Senior Judge Paul A. Magnuson on 03/17/2009. (LM)
|January 27, 2009
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION that: 1. Plaintiff's application to proceed in forma pauperis, (Docket No. 2), be DENIED; 2. This action be SUMMARILY DISMISSED pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b); 3. Plaintiff be required to pay the unpaid balance o f the Court filing fee, namely $346.80, in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(2); and 4. For purposes of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), this action be dismissed "on the grounds that it is frivolous, malicious, or fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted." Objections to R&R due by 2/12/2009. Signed by Magistrate Judge Franklin L. Noel on 1/26/09. (jam)
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system.
A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Minnesota District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?