UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 99-7096

ANTHONY M. ENRIQUEZ, Petitioner - Appellant, versus

STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA; CHARLES M. CONDON, Attorney General of State of South Carolina, Respondents - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. Margaret B. Seymour, District Judge. (CA-98-1840-3-24BC)

Submitted: January 11, 2000 Decided: February 1, 2000

Before MURNAGHAN and NIEMEYER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Anthony M. Enriquez, Appellant Pro Se. Derrick K. McFarland, OF- FICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF SOUTH CAROLINA, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM: Anthony M. Enriquez appeals the district court’s order dis- missing his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 & Supp. 1998). Appellant’s case was referred to a magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) (1994). The magistrate judge recommended that the Respondents’ motion for summary judgment be granted and the petition dismissed. Appellant, who was represented by counsel, failed to object to the magistrate 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. See Wells v. Shriners Hosp., 109 F.3d 198, 201 (4th Cir. 1997). See generally Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985). Appellant has waived appellate review by failing to file objections to the magistrate’s recommendation. We accord- ingly deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal.

We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal conten- tions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED