U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, 2019

Elson McKanic v. Warden Lewis

Elson McKanic v. Warden Lewis
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Decided September 5, 2019

Elson McKanic v. Warden Lewis

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 19-6503

ELSON MCKANIC, Petitioner - Appellant, v. WARDEN LEWIS, Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Rock Hill. Paige Jones Gossett, Magistrate Judge. (0:19-cv-00554-HMH)

Submitted: August 20, 2019 Decided: September 5, 2019

Before KING, WYNN, and RICHARDSON, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Elson McKanic, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM: Elson McKanic seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2012) petition without prejudice as successive. 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 without prejudice and advised McKanic that failure to file timely objections to this recommendation could waive appellate review of a district court order based upon the recommendation. Despite this warning, McKanic did not file objections to the magistrate judge’s 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). McKanic has waived appellate review by failing to file timely objections 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

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.