From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

O'Neal v. Lamanna

United States District Court, D. South Carolina, Charleston Division
Mar 20, 2008
CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:06-1795-HFF-RSC (D.S.C. Mar. 20, 2008)

Opinion

CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:06-1795-HFF-RSC.

March 20, 2008


ORDER


This case was filed as a 28 U.S.C. § 2241 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 the petition be dismissed as moot. 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 February 29, 2008, but 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 standard set forth above, the Court adopts the Report and incorporates it herein. Therefore, it is the judgment of the Court that the petition be DISMISSED as moot.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

NOTICE OF RIGHT TO APPEAL

The parties are hereby notified of the right to appeal this Order within 60 days from the date hereof, pursuant to Rules 3 and 4 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure.


Summaries of

O'Neal v. Lamanna

United States District Court, D. South Carolina, Charleston Division
Mar 20, 2008
CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:06-1795-HFF-RSC (D.S.C. Mar. 20, 2008)
Case details for

O'Neal v. Lamanna

Case Details

Full title:WILEY SIDNEY O'NEAL, JR., Petitioner, v. JOHN J. LAMANNA, Warden…

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

Date published: Mar 20, 2008

Citations

CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:06-1795-HFF-RSC (D.S.C. Mar. 20, 2008)

Citing Cases

Sadler v. Williams

See Madison v. Johnson, No. 3:09-cv-8, 2011 WL 4502801, at *2 (E.D. Va. Sept. 28, 2011). Because “there is no…

Clinton v. South Carolina Department of Corrections

Accordingly, as Petitioner's requested relief is now moot, his § 2241 Petition should be dismissed. Bailey v.…