McCullum v. Smith et al

Filing 16

ORDER adopting 13 Report and Recommendation. This action is dismissed without prejudice and without issuance and service of process. Signed by Honorable Joseph F Anderson, Jr on 6/15/2015. (mwal)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA

Jaquell Antonio McCullum,
Plaintiff,
v.
Officer Aaron Smith; Sgt. Freddie Piage;
Cpt. Joyce Brunson; and Maj. Mike Norris,
Defendants.
____________________________________

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

C/A No.: 1:15-1719-JFA-SVH

ORDER

The pro se plaintiff, Jaquell McCullum, brings this action pursuant to
42 U.S.C.§ 1983. He alleges cruel and unusual punishment, discrimination, and misuse of
authority while he was a pretrial detainee at the Florence County Detention Center (FCDC).
The Magistrate Judge assigned to this action1 has prepared a thorough Report and
Recommendation wherein she suggests that this court should summarily dismiss this action.
The Report sets forth in detail the relevant facts and standards of law on this matter, and the
court incorporates such without a recitation and without a hearing.
The plaintiff was advised of his right to file objections to the Report and

1

The Magistrate Judge’s review is made in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local
Civil Rule 73.02. The Magistrate Judge makes only a recommendation to this court. The recommendation
has no presumptive weight, and the responsibility to make a final determination remains with the court.
Mathews v. Weber, 423 U.S. 261 (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 to the Magistrate
Judge with instructions. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).

1

Recommendation. However, the plaintiff did not file objections and the time within which
to do so has now expired. In the absence of specific objections to the Report of the
Magistrate Judge, 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).
After a careful review of the record, the applicable law, and the Report and
Recommendation, the court finds the Magistrate Judge’s recommendation to be proper and
incorporates the Report herein by reference.
Accordingly, this action is dismissed without prejudice and without issuance and
service of process.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

June 15, 2015
Columbia, South Carolina

Joseph F. Anderson, Jr.
United States District Judge

2