Dicks-Lewis III v. State Of Florida et al

Filing 6

ORDER adopting #5 Report and Recommendation; denying #3 Plaintiff's Application to Proceed in District Court Without Prepaying Fees or Costs; dismissing case; directing the Clerk of the Court to close the file. Signed by Judge Marcia Morales Howard on 9/10/2020. (JW)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
OCALA DIVISION
LARRY DONNELL DICKS-LEWIS III,
Plaintiff,
Case No. 5:20-cv-320-Oc-34PRL
vs.
STATE OF FLORIDA, et al.,
Defendants.
/

ORDER
THIS CAUSE is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation (Doc. 5;
Report), entered by the Honorable Philip R. Lammens, United States Magistrate Judge,
on August 21, 2020.

In the Report, Judge Lammens recommends that Plaintiff’s

Application to Proceed in District Court Without Prepaying Fees or Costs (Doc. 3) be
denied and the case dismissed as frivolous. See Report at 1, 5. No objections to the
Report have been filed, and the time for doing so has now passed.
The Court “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the finding or
recommendations by the magistrate judge.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b). If no specific objections
to findings of facts are filed, the district court is not required to conduct a de novo review
of those findings. See Garvey v. Vaughn, 993 F.2d 776, 779 n.9 (11th Cir. 1993); see
also 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). However, the district court must review legal conclusions de
novo. See Cooper-Houston v. Southern Ry. Co., 37 F.3d 603, 604 (11th Cir. 1994);
United States v. Rice, No. 2:07-mc-8-FtM-29SPC, 2007 WL 1428615, at *1 (M.D. Fla.
May 14, 2007).

Upon independent review of the file and for the reasons stated in the Magistrate
Judge’s Report, the Court will accept and adopt the legal and factual conclusions
recommended by the Magistrate Judge. Accordingly, it is hereby
ORDERED:
1. The Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation (Doc. 5) is ADOPTED
as the opinion of the Court.
2. Plaintiff’s Application to Proceed in District Court Without Prepaying Fees or
Costs (Doc. 3) is DENIED.
3. This case is DISMISSED as frivolous.
4. The Clerk of the Court is directed to terminate any pending motions and close
the file.
5. Plaintiff is advised that if he files such frivolous actions in the future, he may be
subject to sanctions pursuant to Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure. In addition, Plaintiff may be deemed an abusive filer, his in forma
pauperis status may be denied prospectively, and the Clerk may be directed to
refuse to accept any further filings from Plaintiff absent the full filing fee.
DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers this 10th day of September, 2020.

ja
Copies to:
Counsel of Record
Pro Se Parties