Jenkins v. Florence County Detention Center et al

Filing 50

ORDER RULING ON 45 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION. The court adopts Magistrate Judge West's Report and Recommendation and incorporates it herein by reference. It is ordered that Officer Palmer's motion for summary judgment, docket number 32 , is granted and this case is dismissed. Signed by the Honorable Henry M. Herlong, Jr on 5/31/2016. (hcic, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
ORANGEBURG DIVISION
Davon William Jenkins,
Plaintiff,
vs.
Florence County Detention Center1;
Officer Palmer,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

C.A. No. 5:15-3398-HMH-KDW
OPINION & ORDER

This matter is before the court with the Report and Recommendation of United States
Magistrate Judge Kaymani D. West, made in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Local
Civil Rule 73.02 of the District of South Carolina.2 Davon William Jenkins (“Jenkins”), a state
prisoner, proceeding pro se, alleges a violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1983. In her Report and
Recommendation, Magistrate Judge West recommends dismissing this case without prejudice
and without issuance of service of process because Jenkins’ complaint fails to state a cognizable
claim for relief. (Report & Recommendation at 5, ECF No. 7.)
Jenkins filed objections to the Report and Recommendation. Objections to the Report
and Recommendation must be specific. Failure to file specific objections constitutes a waiver of
a party’s right to further judicial review, including appellate review, if the recommendation is
1

The claim against Defendant Florence County Detention Center was previously
dismissed by this court. (Oct. 6, 2015, Order, ECF No. 14.)
2

The recommendation has no presumptive weight, and the responsibility for making a
final determination remains with the United States District 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. The court may
accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the recommendation made by the magistrate judge
or recommit the matter with instructions. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).

accepted by the district judge. See United States v. Schronce, 727 F.2d 91, 94 & n.4 (4th Cir.
1984). In the absence of specific objections to the Report and Recommendation 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).
Upon review, the court finds that Jenkins’ objections are non-specific, unrelated to the
dispositive portions of the magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation, or merely restate his
claims. Accordingly, after review, the court finds that Jenkins’ objections are without merit.
Therefore, after a thorough review of the magistrate judge’s Report and the record in this case,
the court adopts Magistrate Judge West’s Report and Recommendation and incorporates it herein
by reference.
It is therefore
ORDERED that Officer Palmer’s motion for summary judgment, docket number 32, is
granted and this case is dismissed.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/Henry M. Herlong, Jr.
Senior United States District Judge
Greenville, South Carolina
May 31, 2016
NOTICE OF RIGHT TO APPEAL
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.

2