Torrey Washington v. Harold Clarke

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 20-6366
TORREY WASHINGTON,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
HAROLD W. CLARKE,
Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at
Norfolk. Raymond A. Jackson, District Judge. (2:19-cv-00241-RAJ-LRL)
Submitted: July 23, 2020 Decided: July 28, 2020
Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and RICHARDSON, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Torrey Lavell Washington, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Torrey Lavell Washington seeks to appeal the district court’s order accepting the
recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on Washington’s 28 U.S.C.
§ 2254 (2018) petition. The district court referred this case to a magistrate judge pursuant
to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) (2018). The magistrate judge recommended that relief be
denied and advised Washington that failure to file timely, 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). Washington has waived appellate
review by failing to file objections to the magistrate judge’s recommendation after
receiving proper notice.
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