Raymond Fitzgerald v. Harold Clarke
Raymond Fitzgerald v. Harold Clarke
Opinion
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 20-6309
RAYMOND FITZGERALD,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
HAROLD W. CLARKE, Director, Virginia Department of Corrections,
Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Mark S. Davis, Chief District Judge. (2:18-cv-00561-MSD-DEM)
Submitted: March 4, 2021 Decided: March 16, 2021
Before NIEMEYER, DIAZ, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Raymond Fitzgerald, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM:
Raymond Fitzgerald seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his
28 U.S.C. § 2254petition. The district court referred this case to a magistrate judge
pursuant to
28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B). The magistrate judge recommended that relief be
denied and advised Fitzgerald that failure to file timely objections to this recommendation
would waive appellate review of a district court order based upon the 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 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). Fitzgerald 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 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
Reference
- Status
- Unpublished