From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Williams v. Warden of Tyger River

United States District Court, D. South Carolina, Orangeburg Division
Jul 17, 2023
Civil Action 5:22-2702-MGL-KDW (D.S.C. Jul. 17, 2023)

Opinion

Civil Action 5:22-2702-MGL-KDW

07-17-2023

SHONDRE WILLIAMS, Petitioner, v. WARDEN OF TYGER RIVER, Respondent.


ORDER ADOPTING THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION GRANTING RESPONDENT'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, AND DENYING THE PETITION

MARY G. LEWIS UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Petitioner Shondre Williams (Williams) filed this 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition (the petition) against Respondent Warden of Tyger River (Warden). He is representing himself.

The matter is before the Court for review of the Report and Recommendation (Report) of the United States Magistrate Judge suggesting Warden's motion for summary judgment be granted and the petition be denied. The Report was made in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636 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 the Court. Mathews v. Weber, 423 U.S. 261, 270 (1976). The Court is charged with making a de novo determination of those portions of the Report 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. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).

The Magistrate Judge filed the Report on June 28, 2023, but Williams failed to file any objections. “[I]n the absence of a timely filed objection, a district court need not conduct a de novo review, but instead 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) (quoting Fed.R.Civ.P. 72 advisory committee's note). Moreover, a failure to object waives appellate review. Wright v. Collins, 766 F.2d 841, 845-46 (4th Cir. 1985).

After a thorough review of the Report and the record in this case pursuant to the standard set forth above, the Court adopts the Report and incorporates it herein. Therefore, it is the judgment of this Court that the Warden's motion for summary judgment is GRANTED and the petition is DENIED.

To the extent Williams moves for a certificate of appealability, such request is DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

NOTICE OF RIGHT TO APPEAL

The parties are hereby notified of the right to appeal this Order within thirty days from the date hereof, pursuant to Rules 3 and 4 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure.


Summaries of

Williams v. Warden of Tyger River

United States District Court, D. South Carolina, Orangeburg Division
Jul 17, 2023
Civil Action 5:22-2702-MGL-KDW (D.S.C. Jul. 17, 2023)
Case details for

Williams v. Warden of Tyger River

Case Details

Full title:SHONDRE WILLIAMS, Petitioner, v. WARDEN OF TYGER RIVER, Respondent.

Court:United States District Court, D. South Carolina, Orangeburg Division

Date published: Jul 17, 2023

Citations

Civil Action 5:22-2702-MGL-KDW (D.S.C. Jul. 17, 2023)