From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Lomax v. State

United States District Court, D. South Carolina, Anderson Division
Aug 24, 2006
Civil Action No. 8:05-3034-HFF-BHH (D.S.C. Aug. 24, 2006)

Opinion

Civil Action No. 8:05-3034-HFF-BHH.

August 24, 2006


ORDER ADOPTING THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE, GRANTING RESPONDENTS' MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND DISMISSING THE PETITION WITH PREJUDICE


This case was filed as a Section 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 Respondents' Motion for Summary Judgment be granted and the petition be dismissed with prejudice. The Report is 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 August 4, 2006. Petitioner failed to file any objections to the Report. In the absence of objections, the Court is not required to give any explanation for adopting the recommendation. Camby v. Davis, 718 F.2d 198, 199 (4th Cir. 1983). Moreover, a failure to object waives appellate review on those issues. 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, the Court adopts the Report and incorporates it herein. Therefore, it is the judgment of this Court that Respondents' Motion for Summary Judgment must be GRANTED and the petition must be DISMISSED with prejudice.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Lomax v. State

United States District Court, D. South Carolina, Anderson Division
Aug 24, 2006
Civil Action No. 8:05-3034-HFF-BHH (D.S.C. Aug. 24, 2006)
Case details for

Lomax v. State

Case Details

Full title:CHARLES LOMAX, Petitioner, v. STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA and ATTORNEY GENERAL…

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

Date published: Aug 24, 2006

Citations

Civil Action No. 8:05-3034-HFF-BHH (D.S.C. Aug. 24, 2006)