Opinion
CRIM. ACT. 5:23-CR-9 CIV. ACT. 5:24-CV-85
09-10-2024
WILLIAM EDWARD MADDOX, JR., Petitioner, v. USA, Respondent.
ORDER
Bailey, Judge
The above-referenced cases are before this Court upon the magistrate judge's recommendation that petitioner's Motion Under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 to Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct Sentence by a Person in Federal Custody [Civ. Act. No. 5:24-CV-85, Doc. 1; Crim. Act. No. 5:23-CR-9, Doc. 32] be denied and dismissed with prejudice.
This Court is charged with conducting a de novo review of any portion of the magistrate judge's report to which a specific objection is registered, and may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the recommendations contained in that report. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). However, absent prompt objection by a dissatisfied party, it appears that Congress did not intend for the district court to review the factual and legal conclusions of the magistrate judge. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985). Additionally, any party who fails to file timely, written objections to the magistrate judge's report pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) waives the right to raise those objections at the appellate court level. United States v. Schronce, 727 F.2d 91 (4th Cir. 1984), cert, denied, 467 U.S. 1208 (1984). No objections have been filed to the magistrate judge's report and recommendation.
Pursuant to the R&R, “Within fourteen days after service of this Report and Recommendation, the petitioner may file with the Clerk of this Court, specific written objections, identifying the portions of the Report and Recommendation to which objection is made, and the basis of such objection.” See [Civ. Act. No. 5:24-CV-85, Doc. 7 at 10; Crim. Act. No. 5:23-CR-9, Doc. 46 at 10]. Service of the R&R was accepted on August 19, 2024. See [Civil Action No. 5:24-CV-85, Doc. 8; Crim. Act. No. 5:23-CR-9, Doc. 47], August 19,2024, was twenty-two (22) days ago. Thus, this Court did not just wait the standard fourteen (14) days-this Court waited an additional eight (8) days before ruling on the pending R&R.
A de novo review of the record indicates that the magistrate judge's report accurately summarizes this case and the applicable law. Accordingly, the magistrate judge's report and recommendation [Civ. Act. No. 5:24-CV-85, Doc. 7; Crim. Act. No. 5:23-CR-9, Doc. 46] is ADOPTED and the Motion [Civ. Act. No. 5:24-CV-85, Doc. 1; Crim. Act. No. 5:23-CR-9, Doc. 32] is DENIED and DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.
The Clerk is DIRECTED TO STRIKE Civil Action Number 5:24-CV-85 from the active docket of this Court.
It is so ORDERED.
The Clerk is directed to transmit copies of this Order to any counsel of record herein and to mail a copy to petitioner.