Martin v. Angelone
Martin v. Angelone
Opinion
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 98-7779
DERICK DEVON MARTIN, Petitioner - Appellant, versus
RONALD J. ANGELONE, Director of the Virginia Department of Corrections, Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Norfolk. Raymond A. Jackson, District Judge. (CA-98-18-2)
Submitted: March 11, 1999 Decided: March 16, 1999
Before WIDENER and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Derick Devon Martin, Appellant Pro Se. Robert H. Anderson, III, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM: Derick Devon Martin seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 & Supp. 1998). Martin’s case was referred to a magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) (1994). The magistrate judge recommended that relief be denied and advised Martin that failure to file timely objections to this recommendation could waive ap- pellate review of a district court order based upon the recommen- dation. Despite this warning, Martin failed to object to the mag- istrate judge’s recommendation.
The timely filing of 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 that failure to object will waive appellate review. Wright v. Collins, 766 F.2d 841, 845-46 (4th Cir. 1985). See generally Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985). Martin has waived appellate review by failing to file objections after receiving proper notice.
We accordingly 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
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.