Footman v. Banks et al

Filing 23

ORDER accepting the 18 Report and Recommendation, terminating Plaintiff's 22 motion to stay as moot, and dismissing the action for the reasons articulated by the Magistrate Judge. Signed by Chief Judge Terry L. Wooten on 3/22/2017. (bgoo)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA Ron Christopher Footman, #237013 ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) Martin R. Banks and Karen Fryar ) ) ) Defendants. ) ____________________________________) C/A No.: 5:16-1840-TLW-SVH ORDER Plaintiff Ron Christopher Footman, a prisoner 1 proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, filed this action against public defender Martin R. Banks and solicitor Karen Fryar (collectively “Defendants”), alleging violations of his constitutional rights. ECF No. 1. This matter is before the Court for review of the Report and Recommendation (R&R) filed by United States Magistrate Judge Hodges to whom this case was previously assigned. ECF No. 18. In the R&R, the Magistrate Judge recommends dismissing the complaint without prejudice and without issuance and service of process. No objections were filed and the time to do so has expired. 2 This Court is charged with conducting a de novo review of any portion of the Magistrate Judge’s R&R to which a specific objection is registered, and may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the recommendations contained in that R&R. 28 U.S.C. § 636. In the absence of objections to the R&R, 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). 1 Plaintiff was incarcerated in Ridgeland Correctional Institution when he filed this action, but was subsequently released on July 1, 2016. ECF No. 9. 2 Plaintiff asserts he did not receive the R&R upon the Clerk’s initial mailing on July 29, 2016. ECF Nos. 19, 21. The Clerk resent the R&R and on September 29, 2016, Plaintiff filed a motion to stay the case to allow him time to obtain counsel. ECF No. 22. Since the filing of that motion, 6 months have passed and Plaintiff has yet to identify any counsel or file objections to the R&R. In light of these circumstances and the analysis set forth in the R&R Plaintiff’s motion to stay is terminated as moot. This Court carefully reviewed the record in this case and the Magistrate Judge’s R&R, and notes that Plaintiff filed no objections. After appropriate consideration, the Magistrate Judge’s R&R is hereby ACCEPTED. For the reasons articulated by the Magistrate Judge, the case is DISMISSED. IT IS SO ORDERED. s/Terry L. Wooten Chief United States District Judge March 22, 2017 Columbia, South Carolina

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?