From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Glover v. Warden, FCI Ashland

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA GREENVILLE DIVISION
Jul 22, 2019
C.A. No. 6:19-1297-HMH-KFM (D.S.C. Jul. 22, 2019)

Opinion

C.A. No. 6:19-1297-HMH-KFM

07-22-2019

Anthony T. Glover, Petitioner, v. Warden, FCI Ashland, Respondent.


OPINION & ORDER

This matter is before the court for review of the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Kevin F. McDonald, made in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Local Civil Rule 73.02 for the District of South Carolina.

The magistrate judge makes only a recommendation to this court. The recommendation has no presumptive weight. The responsibility to make a final determination remains with this court. See Mathews v. Weber, 423 U.S. 261, 270-71 (1976). The court is charged with making a de novo determination of those portions of the Report and Recommendation to which specific objection is made, and the court may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the recommendation of the magistrate judge or recommit the matter with instructions. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) (2006).

The Petitioner filed no objections to the Report and Recommendation. In the absence of objections to the magistrate judge's Report and Recommendation, this court is not required to give any explanation for adopting the recommendation. See Camby v. Davis, 718 F.2d 198, 199 (4th Cir. 1983). The court must "only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation." Diamond v. Colonial Life & Acc. Ins. Co., 416 F.3d 310, 315 (4th Cir. 2005).

After a thorough review of the Report and Recommendation and the record in this case, the court adopts Magistrate Judge McDonald's Report and Recommendation and incorporates it herein. It is therefore

ORDERED that the petition, docket number 1, is dismissed without prejudice and without requiring the respondent to file an answer or return. It is further

ORDERED that the petitioner's motion for a sentence reduction pursuant to the First Step Act of 2018, docket number 11, is denied without prejudice.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/Henry M. Herlong, Jr.

Senior United States District Judge Greenville, South Carolina
July 22, 2019

NOTICE OF RIGHT TO APPEAL

The Petitioner is hereby notified that he has the right to appeal this order within sixty (60) days from the date hereof, pursuant to Rules 3 and 4 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure.


Summaries of

Glover v. Warden, FCI Ashland

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA GREENVILLE DIVISION
Jul 22, 2019
C.A. No. 6:19-1297-HMH-KFM (D.S.C. Jul. 22, 2019)
Case details for

Glover v. Warden, FCI Ashland

Case Details

Full title:Anthony T. Glover, Petitioner, v. Warden, FCI Ashland, Respondent.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA GREENVILLE DIVISION

Date published: Jul 22, 2019

Citations

C.A. No. 6:19-1297-HMH-KFM (D.S.C. Jul. 22, 2019)

Citing Cases

Tennille v. Terris

A motion for a sentence reduction under the First Step Act must be filed with the court that imposed the…