From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Smith v. Charleston Cnty.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA BEAUFORT DIVISION
Jul 3, 2019
C.A. No. 9:19-967-HMH-BM (D.S.C. Jul. 3, 2019)

Opinion

C.A. No. 9:19-967-HMH-BM

07-03-2019

Shannon Maurice Smith, Jr., Plaintiff, v. Charleston County, Sheriff Al Cannon Detention Center, Cpt. Carter, Chaplain Terrance Smalls, Defendants.


OPINION & ORDER

This matter is before the court for review of the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Bristow Marchant, made in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) 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 this court. See Mathews v. Weber, 423 U.S. 261, 270-71 (1976). The court is charged with making a de novo determination of those portions of the Report and Recommendation 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) (2006).

The Plaintiff filed no objections to the Report and Recommendation. In the absence of objections to the magistrate judge's Report and Recommendation, this court is not required to give any explanation for adopting the recommendation. See Camby v. Davis, 718 F.2d 198, 199 (4th Cir. 1983). The court must "only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation." Diamond v. Colonial Life & Acc. Ins. Co., 416 F.3d 310, 315 (4th Cir. 2005).

After a thorough review of the Report and Recommendation and the record in this case, the court adopts Magistrate Judge Marchant's Report and Recommendation and incorporates it herein. It is therefore

ORDERED that Defendant Sheriff Al Cannon Detention Center is dismissed without prejudice and without issuance and service of process.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/Henry M. Herlong, Jr.

Senior United States District Judge Greenville, South Carolina
July 3, 2019

NOTICE OF RIGHT TO APPEAL

The Plaintiff is hereby notified that he has the right to appeal this order within thirty (30) days from the date hereof, pursuant to Rules 3 and 4 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure.


Summaries of

Smith v. Charleston Cnty.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA BEAUFORT DIVISION
Jul 3, 2019
C.A. No. 9:19-967-HMH-BM (D.S.C. Jul. 3, 2019)
Case details for

Smith v. Charleston Cnty.

Case Details

Full title:Shannon Maurice Smith, Jr., Plaintiff, v. Charleston County, Sheriff Al…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA BEAUFORT DIVISION

Date published: Jul 3, 2019

Citations

C.A. No. 9:19-967-HMH-BM (D.S.C. Jul. 3, 2019)

Citing Cases

Allen v. Cooper

; Smith v. Charleston Cnty., No. CV 9:19-967-HMH-BM, 2019 WL 2870406, at *1 (D.S.C. June 11, 2019), report…