Allen v. Johnson , 294 F. App'x 20 ( 2008 )


Menu:
  •                             UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 08-6745
    EARL ELWOOD ALLEN,
    Petitioner - Appellant,
    v.
    GENE M. JOHNSON, Director of the Virginia Department of
    Corrections,
    Respondent - Appellee.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Rebecca Beach Smith, District
    Judge. (2:07-cv-00196-RBS-TEM)
    Submitted:   September 16, 2008        Decided:   September 22, 2008
    Before MOTZ, TRAXLER, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Earl Elwood Allen, Appellant Pro Se.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    PER CURIAM:
    Earl Elwood Allen seeks to appeal the district court’s
    order denying relief on his 
    28 U.S.C. § 2254
     (2000) petition.          The
    district court referred this case to a magistrate judge pursuant to
    
    28 U.S.C. § 636
    (b)(1)(B) (2000).        The magistrate judge recommended
    that relief be denied and advised Allen 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,   Allen   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). Allen 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
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 08-6745

Citation Numbers: 294 F. App'x 20

Judges: Motz, Traxler, Shedd

Filed Date: 9/22/2008

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 10/19/2024