Green v. State of South Carolina

Filing 21

ORDER: Petitioner is directed to advise the court whether he wishes to continue with this case and to file a response to Respondent's Motion for Summary Judgment, ECF No. 17 , by March 2, 2017. Petitioner is further advised that if he fails to respond, this action will be recommended for dismissal with prejudice for failure to prosecute. Signed by Magistrate Judge Kaymani D West on 2/2/2017. (mcot, )

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA

Richard Avon Green,

Petitioner,
v.
Warden Palmer Pre-Release Center,
Respondent.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

C/A No. 5:16-cv-03191-JFA-KDW

ORDER

Petitioner, Richard Avon Green, is a state prisoner who filed this pro se Petition for a
writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. On December 22, 2016, Respondent
filed a Return and Motion for Summary Judgment. ECF Nos. 16, 17. Because Petitioner is
proceeding pro se, the court entered an order pursuant to Roseboro v. Garrison, 528 F.2d 309
(4th Cir. 1975), advising him of the importance of such motions and of the need for him to
file adequate responses. ECF No. 18. Petitioner was specifically advised that if he failed to
respond adequately, Respondent’s motion may be granted, thereby ending this case.
Notwithstanding the specific warning and instructions set forth in the court’s Roseboro order
Petitioner has failed to respond to the Motion. As such, it appears to the court that he does
not oppose the Motion and wishes to abandon this action. Based on the foregoing, Petitioner
is directed to advise the court whether he wishes to continue with this case and to file a
response to Respondent’s Motion for Summary Judgment by March 2, 2017. Petitioner is
further advised that if he fails to respond, this action will be recommended for dismissal with
prejudice for failure to prosecute. See Davis v. Williams, 588 F.2d 69, 70 (4th Cir. 1978);
Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

February 2, 2017
Florence, South Carolina

Kaymani D. West
United States Magistrate Judge