Robert Koon v. Warden, McCormick Correctional ( 2021 )


Menu:
  •                                      UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 21-6795
    ROBERT HOLLAND KOON, a/k/a Robert Koon, a/k/a Robert H. Koon,
    Petitioner - Appellant,
    v.
    WARDEN MCCORMICK CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION,
    Respondent - Appellee,
    and
    ALAN WILSON,
    Respondent.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Florence.
    David C. Norton, District Judge. (4:21-cv-01026-DCN)
    Submitted: August 24, 2021                                        Decided: August 27, 2021
    Before NIEMEYER and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and SHEDD, Senior Circuit Judge.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Robert Holland Koon, Appellant Pro Se.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    PER CURIAM:
    Robert Holland Koon seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing as
    successive his 
    28 U.S.C. § 2254
     petition.        The district court referred this case to a
    magistrate judge pursuant to 
    28 U.S.C. § 636
    (b)(1)(B).              The magistrate judge
    recommended that the petition be dismissed and advised Koon that failure to file timely
    and specific 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. Martin v. Duffy,
    
    858 F.3d 239
    , 245 (4th Cir. 2017); Wright v. Collins, 
    766 F.2d 841
    , 846-47 (4th Cir. 1985);
    see also Thomas v. Arn, 
    474 U.S. 140
    , 154-55 (1985). Koon has waived appellate review
    by failing to file timely and specific objections to the magistrate judge’s recommendation
    after receiving proper notice. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and
    dismiss the appeal.
    We deny Koon’s motions to appoint counsel and 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
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 21-6795

Filed Date: 8/27/2021

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 8/27/2021