Turner v. State of Minnesota and County of Clay
- Shannon Elkins
- 0:25-cv-03996
- U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
- 2
In Turner v. State of Minnesota and County of Clay, Magistrate Judge Shannon G. Elkins recommends dismissing Marvin James Turner's court petition without prejudice because Turner failed to pay the filing fee or apply for a fee waiver within the required deadline.
Marvin James Turner, the petitioner, who filed a federal habeas corpus petition challenging his custody and whose case may be dismissed for failing to pay the filing fee or apply for a fee waiver.
What happened
In Turner v. State of Minnesota and County of Clay (Case No. 25-cv-3996), Marvin James Turner filed a petition asking the federal court to review his custody or confinement under a federal law known as 28 U.S.C. § 2241. When he filed, he neither paid the required court filing fee nor submitted an application asking the court to waive that fee because he cannot afford it.
The court's clerk sent Turner a letter on October 17, 2025, warning him that he had 15 days — until November 1, 2025 — to either pay the fee or submit a fee-waiver application, or his case could be dismissed. That deadline passed without any response from Turner.
Because Turner did not comply, Magistrate Judge Shannon G. Elkins issued a Report and Recommendation — a formal suggestion to the district court judge — recommending that the case be dismissed for failure to move the case forward, and that his petition be denied. This is not yet a final order; Turner has 14 days after receiving this report to file written objections with the court before a district court judge makes a final decision.
The detailed version
Case: Marvin James Turner v. State of Minnesota and County of Clay, No. 25-cv-3996 (LMP/SGE), United States District Court, District of Minnesota.
Authoring judicial officer: Magistrate Judge Shannon G. Elkins.
Document type: Report and Recommendation (not a final order; subject to objection and review by a district court judge).
Background: Petitioner Marvin James Turner filed a Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241, which is a federal statute allowing a person in custody to challenge the lawfulness of that custody in federal court. Respondents are the State of Minnesota and the County of Clay.
Procedural deficiency: Upon filing, Turner neither paid the required filing fee nor submitted an application to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP) — a formal request to waive or defer the filing fee based on inability to pay. On October 17, 2025, the Clerk of Court sent Turner a letter notifying him of this deficiency and giving him 15 days (until November 1, 2025) to cure it, warning that failure to comply could result in summary dismissal without prejudice (meaning he could potentially refile).
Failure to comply: Turner did not pay the fee or submit an IFP application by the November 1, 2025 deadline, nor apparently at any point before the issuance of this Report and Recommendation on November 17, 2025.
Recommendation: Magistrate Judge Elkins recommends (1) dismissing the action under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) for failure to prosecute — a rule that permits dismissal when a party fails to comply with court orders or to advance their case — citing Henderson v. Renaissance Grand Hotel, 267 F. App'x 496, 497 (8th Cir. 2008); and (2) denying Turner's habeas petition (Dkt. 1).
The dismissal, if adopted by the district court, would be without prejudice based on the clerk's original warning language, though the recommendation itself does not explicitly re-state that characterization.
Next steps: This is a Report and Recommendation, not a final ruling. Under Local Rule 72.2(b)(1), Turner has 14 days after being served this report to file specific written objections. The opposing party then has 14 days to respond to any objections. The matter then goes to the assigned district court judge (designated 'LMP' in the case number) for a final decision. The Report and Recommendation is not directly appealable to the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals.
Reviewer note from the AI+
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.