Garrette v. Gracepoint Mental Health Facility et al

Filing 8

ORDER: The Report and Recommendation (Doc. # 6 ) is accepted and adopted. Plaintiff Denise Garrette's Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. # 2 ) is denied. Plaintiff Garrette's Complaint is dismissed with prejudice. The Clerk is directed to terminate all pending motions and, thereafter, close this case. Signed by Judge Virginia M. Hernandez Covington on 12/12/2016. (DMD)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
TAMPA DIVISION
DENISE GARRETTE,
Plaintiff,
v.

Case No: 8:16-cv-2645-T-33TBM

GRACEPOINT MENTAL HEALTH
FACILITY and HILLSBOROUGH
COUNTY SHERIFF,
Defendants.
______________________________/
ORDER
This matter comes before the Court upon consideration of
United States Magistrate Judge Thomas B. McCoun III’s Report
and Recommendation (Doc. # 6), entered on November 20, 2016,
recommending

that

Plaintiff

Denise

Garrette’s

construed

Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis be denied and
Garrette’s Complaint be dismissed with prejudice. As of the
date of this Order, no objections have been filed and the
time for filing objections has lapsed. The Court accepts and
adopts the Report and Recommendation, denies the Motion for
Leave

to

Proceed

in

forma

pauperis,

and

dismisses

the

Complaint with prejudice.
I.

Background
Garrette, proceeding pro se, filed her Complaint on

September

14,

2016.

In

the

1

rambling

and

disorganized

Complaint,

Garrette

alleges

violations

of

Title

VI,

due

process, and the First and Fourth Amendments, by Gracepoint
Mental Health Facility and the Hillsborough County Sheriff.
(Doc. # 1).
Thereafter, Garrette filed an Affidavit of Indigency,
which the Court construes as a Motion for Leave to Proceed in
forma pauperis (Doc. # 2), and which was referred to Judge
McCoun. Judge McCoun subsequently entered the Report and
Recommendation considered herein.
II.

Discussion
After conducting a careful and complete review of the

findings and recommendations, a district judge may accept,
reject

or

modify

Recommendation.

28

the

magistrate

U.S.C.

§

judge’s

636(b)(1);

Report

and

Williams

v.

Wainwright, 681 F.2d 732 (11th Cir. 1982), cert. denied, 459
U.S. 1112 (1983). In the absence of specific objections, there
is

no

requirement

that

a

district

judge

review

factual

findings de novo, Garvey v. Vaughn, 993 F.2d 776, 779 n.9
(11th Cir. 1993), and the court may accept, reject or modify,
in whole or in part, the findings and recommendations.
U.S.C.

§

636(b)(1)(C).

The

district

judge

reviews

28

legal

conclusions de novo, even in the absence of an objection. See
Cooper-Houston v. S. Ry. Co., 37 F.3d 603, 604 (11th Cir.

2

1994); Castro Bobadilla v. Reno, 826 F. Supp. 1428, 1431-32
(S.D. Fla. 1993), aff’d, 28 F.3d 116 (11th Cir. 1994) (Table).
After conducting a careful and complete review of the
findings, conclusions and recommendations, and giving de novo
review to matters of law, the Court accepts the factual
findings and legal conclusions of the magistrate judge and
the recommendation of the magistrate judge.
Accordingly, it is now
ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED:
(1)

The Report and Recommendation (Doc. # 6) is ACCEPTED and
ADOPTED.

(2)

Plaintiff Denise Garrette’s Motion for Leave to Proceed
in forma pauperis (Doc. # 2) is DENIED.

(3)

Plaintiff

Garrette’s

Complaint

is

DISMISSED

WITH

PREJUDICE.
(4)

The Clerk is directed to terminate all pending motions
and, thereafter, CLOSE this case.
DONE and ORDERED in Chambers in Tampa, Florida, this

12th day of December, 2016.

3