From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Nabritt v. Eagleton

United States District Court, D. South Carolina, Beaufort Division
Apr 18, 2006
Civil Action No. 9:05-2926-HFF-GCK (D.S.C. Apr. 18, 2006)

Opinion

Civil Action No. 9:05-2926-HFF-GCK.

April 18, 2006


ORDER ADOPTING THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE AND GRANTING RESPONDENTS' MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT


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 that Petitioner's petition be denied and dismissed. 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. See 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. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).

The Magistrate Judge filed the Report on March 28, 2006. Petitioner failed to file any objections to the Report. In the absence of such 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. 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 standards set forth above, 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 that Petitioner's petition must be DENIED and DISMISSED. IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Nabritt v. Eagleton

United States District Court, D. South Carolina, Beaufort Division
Apr 18, 2006
Civil Action No. 9:05-2926-HFF-GCK (D.S.C. Apr. 18, 2006)
Case details for

Nabritt v. Eagleton

Case Details

Full title:WILLIE NABRITT, Petitioner, v. WARDEN WILLIE EAGLETON and HENRY McMASTER…

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

Date published: Apr 18, 2006

Citations

Civil Action No. 9:05-2926-HFF-GCK (D.S.C. Apr. 18, 2006)

Citing Cases

Anderson v. Riley

Therefore, this issue should be dismissed. Even if the merits of this issue were reached, Petitioner could…