Opinion
C/A NO. 3:12-2621-CMC-PJG
07-02-2013
Robert Fletcher Herbert, Plaintiff, v. Michael L. Gooding, 0257; and Det. Brian Smith; Defendants.
OPINION and ORDER
This matter is before the court on Plaintiff's pro se complaint, filed in this court pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
In accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Local Civil Rule 73.02 (B)(2)(d), DSC, this matter was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Paige J. Gossett for pre-trial proceedings and a Report and Recommendation ("Report"). On June 20, 2013, the Magistrate Judge issued a Report recommending that Defendants' motion for summary judgment be granted and that other pending motions filed by Plaintiff be terminated. The Magistrate Judge advised Plaintiff of the procedures and requirements for filing objections to the Report and the serious consequences if he failed to do so. On June 27, 2013, Plaintiff filed a multi-page document which cites all of Plaintiff's pending and closed cases, and which seeks relief on a variety of matters. As relates to this matter, Plaintiff seeks an extension of time "on the judgement [sic]." Mot. at 1 (ECF No. 104). Additionally, Plaintiff seeks to amend his complaint to sue "each officer in [his] individual and official capacity (under the tort claims act)[.]" Id. Finally, as relates to this case, Plaintiff contends his "speedy trial rights" have been violated by the various rulings of the Magistrate Judge to whom this matter was assigned, and that he wants to "appeal" this case. Id. at 3.
Since November 2012, Plaintiff has filed seven (7) civil actions in this Court: Herbert v. Gooding, et al.,DSC Civil Action No. 3:12-2621-CMC-PJG; Herbert v. WLTX News, et al., DSC Civil Action No. 3:12-3485-CMC-PJG (dismissed without prejudice on 3/25/13); Herbert v. Treaster, et al., DSC Civil Action No. 3:13-262-CMC-PJG; Herbert v. State of South Carolina, et al.,DSC Civil Action No. 3:13-453-CMC-PJG (dismissed with prejudice and counted as strike under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) on 5/21/13); Herbert v. Weed, DSC Civil Action No. 3:13-1343-CMC-PJG; Herbert v. Prestigiacomo,DSC Civil Action No. 3:13-1354-CMC-PJG; and Herbert v. Stoudemire, DSC Civil Action No. 3:13-1570-CMC-PJG.
This document was filed separately in all the civil actions listed in note 1, receiving a separate document number in each case.
The Magistrate Judge makes only a recommendation to this court. The recommendation has no presumptive weight, and the responsibility to make a final determination remains with the court. See Mathews v. Weber,423 U.S. 261 (1976). The court is charged with making a de novo determination of any portion of the Report of the Magistrate Judge 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 recommit the matter to the Magistrate Judge with instructions. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b).
After conducting a de novo review as to the objections made, and considering the record, the applicable law, the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, and Plaintiff's "objections," the court agrees with the conclusions of the Magistrate Judge. Accordingly, the court adopts and incorporates the Report and Recommendation by reference in this Order.
Throughout Plaintiff's filing, he contends that his "speedy trial rights" have been violated and that the Report's alleged failure to find perjury in the Defendants' submissions in support of summary judgment is based upon judicial bias and racial prejudice. These assertions are frivolous and without merit.
The Speedy Trial Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3161, et seq. applies to criminal defendants' rights to be brought to trial in criminal cases brought in the United States District Court. It does not apply to civil actions.
--------
Additionally, Plaintiff's request for additional time "on the judgement [sic]" is denied. Plaintiff received a copy of the Report, and has responded to it, albeit in a rambling and incoherent manner.
Defendants' motion for summary judgment is granted. Plaintiff's other pending motions in this matter are denied, and this matter is dismissed with prejudice.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
_____________
CAMERON MCGOWAN CURRIE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Columbia, South Carolina
July 2, 2013