Cleveland v. United States of America

Filing 15

ORDER adopting 12 Report and Recommendations of Magistrate Judge Bristow Marchant. The petitioner's objections 14 are overruled. The Petition for Writ of Mandamus is dismissed without prejudice and without requiring Respondent to file an Answer or return. Signed by Honorable Terry L Wooten on 7/18/2011.(cwhi, )

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

Gregory Matthew Cleveland,

)
)
Petitioner,
)
)
vs.
)
)
United States of America,
)
)
Respondents.
)
__________________________________________)

C.A. No. 9:11-cv-1335-TLW-BM

ORDER

The petitioner, a pre-trial detainee at the Spartanburg County Detention Facility in
Spartanburg, South Carolina, seeks a writ of mandamus to direct the United States to indict him on
federal criminal charges. (Doc. # 1). This matter is now before the undersigned for review of the
Report and Recommendation (“the Report”) filed by United States Magistrate Judge Bristow
Marchant, to whom this case had previously been assigned pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Local
Rule 73.02(B)(2) (D.S.C.). In his Report, Magistrate Judge Marchant recommends that the Petition
for Writ of Mandamus be dismissed without prejudice and without requiring Respondent to file an
Answer or return. (Doc. # 12). Petitioner has filed objections to the Report. (Doc. # 14).
In conducting this review, the Court applies the following standard:
The magistrate judge makes only a recommendation to the Court, to which any party
may file written objections. . . . The Court is not bound by the recommendation of the
magistrate judge but, instead, retains responsibility for the final determination. The
Court is required to make a de novo determination of those portions of the report or
specified findings or recommendation as to which an objection is made. However,
the Court is not required to review, under a de novo or any other standard, the factual
or legal conclusions of the magistrate judge as to those portions of the Report and
Recommendation to which no objections are addressed. While the level of scrutiny
entailed by the Court's review of the Report thus depends on whether or not
1

objections have been filed, in either case, the Court is free, after review, to accept,
reject, or modify any of the magistrate judge's findings or recommendations.
Wallace v. Housing Auth. of the City of Columbia, 791 F.Supp. 137, 138 (D.S.C. 1992) (citations
omitted).
In light of this standard, the Court has reviewed, de novo, the Report and the objections
thereto. The Court accepts the Report.
THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge’s Report is
ACCEPTED (Doc. # 12), petitioner’s objections are OVERRULED (Doc. # 14); and the Petition
for Writ of Mandamus is DISMISSED without prejudice and without requiring Respondent to file
an Answer or return.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/ Terry L. Wooten
TERRY L. WOOTEN
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

July 18, 2011
Florence, South Carolina

2