Graham v. Padula , 415 F. App'x 477 ( 2011 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 10-7642
ERIC A. GRAHAM,
Petitioner – Appellant,
v.
A. J. PADULA,
Respondent – Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Columbia. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., Senior
District Judge. (3:09-cv-03041-HMH)
Submitted: February 28, 2011 Decided: March 9, 2011
Before TRAXLER, Chief Judge, and KING and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Eric A. Graham, Appellant Pro Se. Donald John Zelenka, Deputy
Assistant Attorney General, Brendan McDonald, OFFICE OF THE
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF SOUTH CAROLINA, Columbia, South Carolina,
for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Eric A. Graham seeks to appeal the district court’s
order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2006) petition.
The district court referred this case to a magistrate judge
pursuant to 28 U.S.C.A. § 636(b)(1)(B) (West 2006 & Supp. 2010).
The magistrate judge recommended that relief be denied and
advised Graham that failure to file timely 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. Wright v. Collins, 766 F.2d 841, 845-46
(4th Cir. 1985); see also Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985).
Graham has waived appellate review by failing to file
objections. 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 the court and argument would not aid the decisional
process.
DISMISSED
2