Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Korsh v. Marques

United States District Court, D. Minnesota

February 5, 2018

Michael Lloyd Korsh, Petitioner,
v.
Warden R. Marques, Respondent.

          Michael Lloyd Korsh, pro se.

          Ana H. Voss, Ann M. Bildtsen, & David W. Fuller, United States Attorne for Respondent.

          MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

          SUSAN RICHARD NELSON, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

         This matter comes before the Court on the Objection (“Objection”) [Doc. No. 15] of Petitioner Michael Lloyd Korsh to Magistrate Leo Brisbois's Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) dated July 2, 2018 [Doc. No. 14]. In the R&R, Magistrate Judge Brisbois recommended that Korsh's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (“Petition”) [Doc. No. 1] be denied. For the reasons set forth below, and after a de novo review, the Petition is denied as moot.

         I. Background

         Petitioner pled guilty to possession of child pornography in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2252(a)(4)(B) and (b)(2). USA v. Korsh, No. 16-cr-261, Plea Agreement [Doc. No. 14]. Petitioner was sentenced to a thirty-month term of imprisonment and ten years of supervised release on April 27, 2017. Id.

         When Petitioner filed this Petition on May 3, 2018, he was in the custody of the Federal Correctional Institute (“FCI”) in Sandstone, Minnesota. (Petition at 1.) Petitioner argues that the Bureau of Prisons (“BOP”) was arbitrary and capricious when it placed him in a residential reentry center (“RRC”) in Edina, Minnesota on September 25, 2018, instead of on his original placement date of July 31, 2018. (Petition at 6-7; Pet'r's Mem. in Supp. [Docket No. 3] at 7-13.) Petitioner claims that he was entitled to complete 180 days in the RRC, instead of the 123 days he was ultimately assigned. (Petition at 8.)

         In his R&R, Magistrate Judge Brisbois recommended denying the Petition and dismissing the action with prejudice. (R&R at 9.) Specifically, Magistrate Judge Brisbois determined that the Court lacked subject matter jurisdiction to consider Petitioner's claims and that the BOP did not violate any federal statutes or the Constitution. (Id. at 7, 9.)

         However, on January 25, 2019, Petitioner was released from custody and his period of supervised release began. Korsh, No. 16-cr-261, Supervised Release: Modification of Conditions [Doc. No. 51].

         II. Discussion

         A. Standard of Review

         Upon issuance of an R&R, a party may “serve and file specific written objections to the proposed findings and recommendations.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b)(2). The objections should specify the portion of the magistrate judge's [R&R] to which objections are made and provide a basis for those objections.” Mayer v. Walvatne, No. 07-cv-1958 (JRT/RLE), 2008 WL 4527774, at *2 (D. Minn. Sept. 28, 2008). Then, the district court will review de novo those portions of the R&R to which an objection is made, and it “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C); Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b)(3); D. Minn. LR 72.2(b)(3).

         B. Analysis

         Article III of the Constitution grants jurisdiction over cases and controversies. Ali v. Cangemi, 419 F.3d 722, 723 (8th Cir. 2005). If a subsequent development in a case results in a court's inability to “grant effective relief, the case is considered moot.” Id. (citation omitted); see also Roberts v. Norris, 415 F.3d 816, 819 (8th Cir. 2005). A petitioner's release from custody does not automatically render the petition moot. Estrada-Heredia v. Holder, No. 12-cv-1157 SRN/SER, 2012 WL 4839113 (D. Minn. Sept. 25, 2012), report and recommendation adopted, No. 12-cv-1157 SRN/SER, 2012 ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.