Summary
finding that it is not an abuse of discretion for the BOP to assign an inmate convicted of a homicide offense a greatest severity PSF
Summary of this case from Cammarano v. StansberryOpinion
C/A No. 0:05-2260-MBS.
June 13, 2006
OPINION AND ORDER
Petitioner Dale N. Smith is an inmate in custody of the Federal Bureau of Prisons who currently is housed at FCI-Edgefield. Petitioner, appearing pro se, filed the within petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241, seeking a redesignation of his place of confinement to New Mexico.
This matter is before the court on Respondent's motion to dismiss or, in the alternative, for summary judgment, filed October 14, 2005. Respondent asserts that the within § 2241 petition should be dismissed because Defendant has failed to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. On October 17, 2005, an order was issued pursuant to Roseboro v. Garrison, 528 F.2d 309 (4th Cir. 1975), advising Petitioner of the dismissal and summary judgment procedures and the possible consequences if he failed to respond adequately. Petitioner filed a response on October 25, 2005, together with a supplemental response on October 31, 2005.
In accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Local Rule 73.02, D.S.C., this matter was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Bristow Marchant for pretrial handling. On May 12, 2006, the Magistrate Judge issued a Report and Recommendation in which he recommended that Respondent's motion be granted and the § 2241 petition be dismissed. Petitioner filed no objections to the Report and Recommendation.
The Magistrate Judge makes only a recommendation to this court. The recommendation has no presumptive weight. The responsibility for making a final determination remains with this court.Mathews v. Weber, 423 U.S. 261, 270 (1976). The court is charged with making a de novo determination of any portions of the Report and Recommendation to which a specific objection is made. The court may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the recommendation made by the Magistrate Judge or may recommit the matter to the Magistrate Judge with instructions. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). In the absence of objections to the Report, this court is not required to give any explanation for adopting the recommendation. Camby v. Davis, 718 F.2d 198, 199 (4th Cir. 1983).
The court has carefully reviewed the record and concurs in the recommendation of the Magistrate Judge. Accordingly, Respondent's motion is granted and the case dismissed for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.
IT IS SO ORDERED.