Mungin v. Magwood et al

Filing 25

ORDER ADOPTING 16 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS of Magistrate Judge Bristow Marchant and dismissing the Charleston County Sheriff's Office as a party Defendant. Signed by Honorable Margaret B Seymour on 4/28/11. (rpol, ) Modified on 4/29/2011 to correct signature date (rpol, ).

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
Darryl Mungin, # 255562,

)
) C/A No. 2:11-0340-MBS-BM
Plaintiff,
)
)
vs.
)
ORDER
)
Detective Eugene Magwood; and
)
Charleston County Sheriff’s Office,
)
)
Defendants.
)
____________________________________)
Plaintiff Darryl Mungin is an inmate in custody of the South Carolina Department of
Corrections (SCDC). He currently is housed at the Walden Correctional Institution in Columbia,
South Carolina. Plaintiff, proceeding pro se, brings this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983,
alleging that his constitutional rights were violated with respect to certain criminal charges that were
dropped.
In accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Local Rule 73.02, D.S.C., this matter was referred
to United States Magistrate Judge Bristow Marchant for pretrial handling. The Magistrate Judge
reviewed the complaint pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915 and 1915A. On March 29,
2011, the Magistrate Judge filed a Report and Recommendation in which he recommended that
Defendant Charleston County Sheriff’s Office be summarily dismissed because, as a state agency,
it is immune from suit under the Eleventh Amendment. Plaintiff filed no objections to the Report
and Recommendation.
The Magistrate Judge makes only a recommendation to this court. The recommendation has
no presumptive weight. The responsibility for making a final determination remains with this court.
Mathews v. Weber, 423 U.S. 261, 270 (1976). The court may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or

in part, the Report and Recommendation or may recommit the matter to the Magistrate Judge with
instructions. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). In the absence of a timely filed objection, a district court need
not conduct a de novo review, but instead 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).
The court has thoroughly reviewed the record.

The court adopts the Report and

Recommendation and incorporates it herein by reference. Defendant Charleston County Sheriff’s
Office is dismissed as a party without prejudice and without issuance and service of process. The
case is recommitted to the Magistrate Judge for further pretrial handling.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

/s/ Margaret B. Seymour
United States District Judge
Columbia, South Carolina
April 28, 2011

2