Cole v. Georgetown, County of et al, No. 2:2016cv03548 - Document 29 (D.S.C. 2017)

Court Description: ORDER AND OPINION adopting 23 Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Mary Gordon Baker. Plaintiff's amended complaint is DISMISSED without prejudice and without issuance of service of process. Signed by Honorable Richard M Gergel on 2/24/2017.(ssam, )
Download PDF
Cole v. Georgetown, County of et al Doc. 29 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA CHARLESTON DIVISION Brandon Vernon Cole, #319318, Plaintiff, v. Alma White, et aI., Defendants. Case No 2: 16-cv-3548-RMG ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ORDER AND OPINION ) Brandon Vernon Cole (the "Plaintiff'), was a state prisoner incarcerated at Manning Correctional Institution in South Carolina. He filed this civil action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and is proceeding pro se and inJormapauperis. (Dkt. No.6.) This matter is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation (HR. & R.") of the Magistrate Judge to summarily dismiss Plaintiff's amended complaint. (Dkt. No. 23.) The R. & R. was mailed to Plaintiff on February 2, 2017. (Dkt. No. 24.) On February 6, 2017, the Court received a change of address notice from Plaintiff who has been released from Manning Correctional Institution into the community. (Dkt. No. 25.) In that notice, Plaintiff asked this Court to accept additional information relevant to his § 1983 claim. The letter did not contain any specific objections to the R. & R., and Plaintiff has not otherwise filed objections to the R. & R. This Court has reviewed Plaintiff's amended complaint, the R. & R., and Plaintiffs change of address notice. While this Court will conduct a de novo review of any portion of the R. & R. to which a specific objection is made, it appears Congress did not intend for the district court to review the factual and legal conclusions ofthe Magistrate absent objection by any party. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Thomas v. Am, 474 U.S. 140 (1985). -1Dockets.Justia.com A de novo review of the record indicates that the R. & R. accurately analyzes the facts of this case and the applicable law. Plaintiffs February 6,2017 letter to this Court contains similar facts and allegations to those in his amended complaint, including deficient, non-specific, and unclear allegations about violations of Plaintiffs rights with regard to his grand jury indictment, a preliminary hearing, and Brady violations. The R. & R. adequately explains why Plaintiff has failed to state a claim for relief on any of those grounds. Accordingly, this Court adopts the Magistrate's R. & R. as the Order of this Court. Plaintiffs amended complaint is DISMISSED without prejudice and without issuance of service of process. AND IT IS SO ORDERED. United States District Court Judge If, 2017 February Charleston, South Carolina -2-