Young v. State of South Carolina ( 2010 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 09-7082
JAMES YOUNG,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA; ROBERT STEVENSON, BRCI Warden,
Respondents - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Columbia. Patrick Michael Duffy, Senior
District Judge. (3:08-cv-01053-PMD)
Submitted: January 19, 2010 Decided: January 26, 2010
Before NIEMEYER, KING, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
James Young, Appellant Pro Se. Donald John Zelenka, Deputy
Assistant Attorney General, Melody Jane Brown, Assistant
Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
James Young seeks to appeal the district court’s order
denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2006) petition. The
district court referred this case to a magistrate judge pursuant
to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) (2006). The magistrate judge
recommended that relief be denied and advised Young that failure
to file timely objections to this recommendation could waive
appellate review of a district court order based upon the
recommendation. Despite this warning, Young failed to object to
the magistrate judge’s 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. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985). Young
has waived appellate review by failing to timely file specific
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 the court and argument would not aid the decisional
process.
DISMISSED
2