Summary
The United States District Court for the District of South Carolina adopted a magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation in a state prisoner’s habeas action under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The court granted the respondent’s motion for summary judgment, dismissed the petition with prejudice, and denied a certificate of appealability.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the district court should adopt an unobjected-to magistrate judge's Report and Recommendation after reviewing the record for clear error.
- Whether respondent was entitled to summary judgment and dismissal with prejudice of the § 2254 petition.
- Whether petitioner was entitled to a certificate of appealability.
Holdings
- When no specific objections are filed, the district court may accept the magistrate judge's recommendation after satisfying itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record.
- Respondent was entitled to summary judgment, and petitioner's § 2254 habeas petition was dismissed with prejudice.
- A certificate of appealability was denied because petitioner failed to make a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.
Key quotations
“In the absence of objections, the court is not required to provide an explanation for adopting the Report and must “only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation.””
“a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.”
Factual background
Donald A. Partaka is a state prisoner who sought federal habeas relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The magistrate judge concluded that multiple grounds supported dismissal, including the statute of limitations, and recommended granting the respondent's motion for summary judgment. Partaka did not file objections to the Report and Recommendation before the objection period expired.
Procedural history
Petitioner filed a § 2254 habeas petition. Respondent moved for summary judgment, and Magistrate Judge Mary Gordon Baker recommended granting the motion and dismissing the petition with prejudice on multiple grounds, including the statute of limitations. Petitioner filed no objections within the applicable period. The district court found no clear error, adopted the Report and Recommendation, granted summary judgment, dismissed the petition with prejudice, and denied a certificate of appealability.