Petition for Writ of Certiorari — John C. Robinson, Petitioner v. South Carolina Department of Probation, Parole, and Pardon Services, et al.

IL.

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 17-7027

JOHN C. ROBINSON,

Petitioner Appellant,

-

V.

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF PROBATION

PAROLE AND PARDON SERVICES; WARDEN, BROAD RIVER

CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION,

/

Respondents Appellees.

.-

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Aiken.

Timothy M. Cain, District Judge. (1:16-cv-03324-TMC)

Submitted: December 19, 2017

Decided: December 21, 2017

Before SHEDD, AGEE, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

John C. Robinson, Appellant Pro Se. Tommy Evans, Jr., SOUTH CAROLINA

DEPARTMENT OF PROBATION, PAROLE & PARDON SERVICE, Columbia, South

Carolina; Christina Catoe Bigelow, SOUTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF

CORRECTIONS, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

e.., Appec's D

PER CURTAM:

John C. Robinson seeks to appeal the district court's order denying relief on his 28

U.S.C. § 2254 (2012) petition. The district court referred this case to a magistrate judge

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) (2012). The magistrate judge recommended that

relief be denied and advised Robinson that failure to file timely objections to this

recommendation could waive appellate review of a district court order based upon the

recommendation.

The timely filing of specific objections to a magistrate judge's recommendation is

necessary to preserve appellate review of the substance of that recommendation when the

parties have been warned of the consequences of noncompliance. Wright v. Collins, 766

F.2d 841, 845-46 (4th Cir. 1985); see also Thomas v. Am, 474 U.S. 140 (1985).

Robinson has waived appellate review by failing to file objections after receiving proper

notice. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal.

We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are

adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the

decisional process.

DISMISSED

FILED: December 21, 2017

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 17-7027

(1: 16-cv-03324-TMC)

JOHN C. ROBINSON

Petitioner Appellant

-

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF PROBATION

PAROLE AND PARDON SERVICES; WARDEN, BROAD RIVER

CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION

Respondents Appellees

-

JUDGMENT

In accordance with the decision of this court, a certificate of appealability is

denied and the appeal is dismissed.

This judgment shall take effect upon issuance of this court's mandate in

accordance with Fed. R. App. P. 41.

Is! PATRICIA S. CONNOR, CLERK

-

------Case: 1:16cv03324-IMC_ Docurnent#: 40-1Oate Filed: 01/13/2Q17Page 1 o 2

Io 17-7027

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA

AIKEN DIVISION

John C. Robinson,

Civil Action No. 1:16-3324-TMC

Petitioner,

ORDER

V.

The State of South Carolina Department

of Probation, Parole, and Pardon Services,

and Warden of Broad River Correctional

Institution,

Respondents

Petitioner John C. Robinson, proceeding pro se, is seeking habeas corpus relief pursuant to

28 U.S.C. § 2254.' Before the court is the magistrate judge's Report and Recommendation

("Report"), recommending that the South Carolina Department of Probation, Parole and Pardon

Services' ("SCDPPPS") Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 18) be granted; Warden of Broad

River Correctional Institution's ("Warden") First Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 32) be granted; and

Petitioner's petition be dismissed with prejudice. (ECF No. 38). Petitioner was advised of his right

to file objections to the Report. (ECF No. 38 at 10). However, Petitioner has not filed objections,

and the time to do so has now run.

The Report has no presumptive weight and the responsibility to make a final determination

remains with this court. See Mathews v. Weber, 423 U.S. 261, 270-71 (1976). In the absence of

objections to the Report, this court is not required to provide an explanation for adopting the

recommendation. See Camby v. Davis, 718 F.2d 198, 199 (4th Cir. 1983). Rather, "in the absence

In accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Civil Rule 73.02, DSC, this matter was

initially referred to a magistrate judge.

c

Obl

44Z€0///7

sej6cy-03324-TMQ Document #: 40-1 Date Filed: 07/13/2017 Page 2 of 2

AI8r/7702'l

of a timely filed objection, a district court need not conduct a de novo review, but instead must only

satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the

recommendation." Diamond v. Colonial Life & Acc. Ins. Co., 416 F.3d 310, 315 (4th Cir. 2005)

ir

(quoting Fed. R. Civ. P. 72 advisory committee's note).

After a thorough review, the court finds no clear error and, therefore, adopts the Report (ECF

No. 38) and incorporates it herein by reference. Therefore, SCDPPPS' Motion for Summary

Judgment (ECF No. 18) is GRANTED; Warden's First Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 32) is

GRANTED, and this habeas petition is DISMISSED with prejudice.

In addition, a certificate of appealability will not issue to a prisoner seeking habeas relief

absent "a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right." 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2). A

prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find both that his

constitutional claims are debatable and that any dispositive procedural rulings by the district court

are also debatable or wrong. See Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336 (2003); Rose v. Lee, 252

F.3d 676, 683 (4th Cir. 2001). In this case, the court finds that the petitioner has failed to make a

substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. Accordingly, the court declines to issue

a certificate of appealability.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/Timothy M. Cain

United States District Judge

July 13,2017

Anderson, South Carolina

•1

or,

on

o4

'1

yTU

FILED: February 6, 2018

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 17-7027

(1: 16-cv-03324-TMC)

JOHN C. ROBINSON

Petitioner Appellant

-

V.

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF PROBATION

PAROLE AND PARDON SERVICES; WARDEN, BROAD RIVER

CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION

Respondents Appellees

-

ORDER

The court denies the petition for rehearing and rehearing en banc. No judge

requested a poll under Fed. R. App. P. 35 on the petition for rehearing en banc.

Entered at the direction of the panel: Judge Agee, Judge Diaz and Senior

Judge Shedd.

For the Court

Is! Patricia S. Connor, Clerk