Dena Minton v. Miranda Richardson
Dena Minton v. Miranda Richardson
Opinion
USCA4 Appeal: 23-6010 Doc: 19 Filed: 08/31/2023 Pg: 1 of 2
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 23-6010
DENA INEZ MINTON, Petitioner - Appellant, v. MIRANDA RICHARDSON, Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. Thomas D. Schroeder, District Judge. (1:21-cv-00806-TDS-JEP)
Submitted: August 29, 2023 Decided: August 31, 2023
Before KING, AGEE, and BENJAMIN, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Dena Inez Minton, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 23-6010 Doc: 19 Filed: 08/31/2023 Pg: 2 of 2
PER CURIAM: Dena Inez Minton seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing her 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition as untimely filed, and a subsequent order denying reconsideration. 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 Minton that failure to file timely, specific objections to this recommendation could waive appellate review of a district court order based upon the 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. 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). Minton has forfeited 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 also deny as moot Minton’s motion to attend hearings in this court. 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.