Alaric Wayne Hunt seeks to appeal the district court’s order adopting the report and recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on Hunt’s 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) petition. We have reviewed the record, the district court’s opinion, and the magistrate judge’s report, and we find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm substantially for the reasons stated by the district court. See *86 Hunt v. Rushton, No. CA-00-2848-723BG (D.S.C. Mar. 28, 2002). In addition, we note that certain issues raised in Hunt’s informal brief on appeal were waived by his failure to raise them in his objections to the magistrate judge’s report. See Wright v. Collins, 766 F.2d 841, 844-46 (4th Cir. 1985); see also Orpiano v. Johnson, 687 F.2d 44, 47 (4th Cir. 1982) (failure to file specific objections to particular conclusions in magistrate judge’s report, after being warned of consequences, waives further review). 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.

AFFIRMED.