Robeson v. English

Filing 6

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS. Adopting 4 Report and Recommendation; Denying 3 Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis in District Court filed by Jasmine R. Robeson (Written Opinion). Signed by Senior Judge David S. Doty on 11/28/2011. (PJM) (cc: Jasmine Robeson) Modified on 11/28/2011 (akl).

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA
Civil No. 11-3237(DSD/JSM)
Jasmine R. Robeson,
Petitioner,
ORDER

v.
Nicole English,
Warden F.C.I.-Warden,
Respondent.

This matter is before the court upon the pro se objection of
petitioner Jasmine R. Robeson to the November 11, 2011, report and
recommendation

of

Magistrate

Judge

Janie

S.

Mayeron.

The

magistrate judge recommends denial of the petition and summary
dismissal of the action.

Robeson timely objects, arguing that

after November 1, 2011, “the [Fair Sentencing Act of 2010] FSA is
(now) retroactive” and that the magistrate judge improperly relied
on cases decided before November 1, 2011.
The

court

reviews

magistrate judge de novo.

the

report

and

Pet’r’s Obj. 1.
recommendation

of

the

28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C); Fed. R. Civ.

P. 72(b)(3); D. Minn. LR 72.2(b).

After a de novo review, the

court finds that the report and recommendation of the magistrate
judge is well reasoned and correctly disposes of the petition.

On

November 1, 2011, amendments to the advisory Guidelines became
retroactive, but the FSA does not apply retroactively.

See United

States v. Bones, 2011 WL 5838671, at *1 (8th Cir. Nov. 21, 2011)
(per curiam) (“[O]ur Court has ‘definitively determined’ that the

FSA is not retroactive.” (citations omitted); accord United States
v. Bullard, 645 F.3d 237, 249 (4th Cir. 2011).
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1.

Petitioners objections [ECF No. 5] are overruled;

2.

The report and recommendation of the magistrate judge

[ECF No. 4] is adopted in its entirety;
3.

The application for habeas corpus relief under 28 U.S.C.

§ 2241 (ECF No. 1) is denied;
3.

The application to proceed in forma pauperis [ECF No. 3]

is denied; and
4.

This action is summarily dismissed with prejudice.

LET JUDGEMENT BE ENTERED ACCORDINGLY.
Dated:

November 28, 2011
s/David S. Doty
David S. Doty, Judge
United States District Court

2