Juan Ramirez v. Erik Hooks ( 2018 )


Menu:
  •                                     UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 18-6180
    JUAN CARLOS OLIVO RAMIREZ,
    Petitioner - Appellant,
    v.
    ERIK A. HOOKS,
    Respondent - Appellee.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at
    Greensboro. Catherine C. Eagles, District Judge. (1:17-cv-01157-CCE-LPA)
    Submitted: April 19, 2018                                         Decided: April 24, 2018
    Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and THACKER and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Juan Carlos Olivo Ramirez, Appellant Pro Se.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    PER CURIAM:
    Juan Carlos Olivo Ramirez seeks to appeal the district court’s order adopting the
    magistrate judge’s recommendation and dismissing without prejudice Ramirez’s 28 U.S.C.
    § 2254 (2012) petition as successive and unauthorized. 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 dismissal of the petition, and Ramirez was warned 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. Arn, 
    474 U.S. 140
    (1985). Ramirez
    has waived appellate review by failing to file objections.       Accordingly, we deny a
    certificate of appealability, deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis, 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
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 18-6180

Filed Date: 4/24/2018

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 4/24/2018