Lawrence v. Bodieson, No. 0:2008cv01823 - Document 64 (D.S.C. 2009)
Court Description: ORDER and OPINION RULING ON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS adopting 58 Report and Recommendations, granting 35 Motion for Summary Judgment filed by McKither Bodieson. Signed by Honorable Cameron McGowan Currie on 9/14/2009. (jpet, ) Modified to edit text on 9/14/2009 (jpet, ).
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA ROCK HILL DIVISION Johnny Lawrence, # 232835, ) ) Petitioner, ) ) v. ) ) McKither Bodison, ) ) Respondent. ) ___________________________________ ) C/A NO. 0:08-1823-CMC-PJG OPINION and ORDER This matter is before the court on Petitioner s pro se application for writ of habeas corpus, filed in this court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. In accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Local Civil Rule 73.02 (B)(2)(c), DSC, this matter was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Paige J. Gossett for pre-trial proceedings and a Report and Recommendation ( Report ). On August 27, 2009, the Magistrate Judge issued a Report recommending that Respondent s motion for summary judgment be granted and this matter dismissed with prejudice. The Magistrate Judge advised Petitioner of the procedures and requirements for filing objections to the Report and t he serious consequences if he failed to do so. Petitioner filed objections to the Report on September 9, 2009. The Magistrate Judge makes only a recommendation to this court. The recommendation has no presumptive weight, and the responsibility to make a final determination remains with the court. See Mathews v. Weber, 423 U.S. 261 (1976). The court is charged with making a de novo determination of any portion of the Report of the Magistrate Judge to which a 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 to the Magistrate Judge with instructions. See 28 1 U.S.C. § 636(b). After reviewing the record of this matter, the applicable law, the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, and Petitioner s objections, the court agrees with the conclusions of the Magistrate Judge. Accordingly, the court adopts and incorporates the Report and Recommendation by reference in this Order. The Magistrate Judge is correct in her analysis that Petitioner s time for filing a § 2254 petition had expired even before he filed his petition in 2006. Petitioner argues in his objections that equitable tolling should apply because of the dismissal of an earlier § 2254 petition, alleged bias of this court, and a variety of alleged problems with his direct appeal and application for post-conviction relief. However, Petitioner offers no persuasive argument or legal authority to indicate the Magistrate Judge erred in her analysis of the motion and the petition. Therefore, Respondent s motion for summary judgment is granted and this matter is dismissed with prejudice. IT IS SO ORDERED. s/ Cameron McGowan Currie CAMERON MCGOWAN CURRIE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Columbia, South Carolina September 14, 2009 C:\Documents and Settings\jmp20\Local Settings\Temp\notesE1EF34\08-1823 Lawrence v. Bodison adopt rr gr sumjgm untimely.wpd 2
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
