Summary
finding the petitioner was not entitled to habeas relief on a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel for failure to object to the prosecutor's statement in closing argument where, inter alia, counsel testified as to his strategic reasons for not objecting
Summary of this case from Huckabee v. StevensonOpinion
CIVIL ACTION NO. 6:07-2933-HFF-WMC.
August 21, 2008
ORDER
This case was filed as a 28 U.S.C. § 2254 action. Petitioner is proceeding pro se. The matter is before the Court for review of the Report and Recommendation (Report) of the United States Magistrate Judge suggesting that Respondent's motion for summary judgment be granted and the petition be dismissed. 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 July 24, 2008, and the Clerk of Court entered Petitioner's objections to the Report on August 12, 2008.
After a thorough review of the Report, the objections thereto, and the record in this case pursuant to the standard set forth above, the Court overrules Petitioner's objections, finding them to be without merit and adopts the Report and incorporates it herein. Therefore, it is the judgment of this Court that Respondent's motion for summary judgment be GRANTED and the petition be DISMISSED with prejudice.