United States v. Eunice Husband , 544 F. App'x 230 ( 2013 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 13-7170
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
EUNICE HUSBAND,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern
District of West Virginia, at Clarksburg. John Preston Bailey,
Chief District Judge. (1:08-cr-00016-JPB-1; 1:12-cv-00096-JPB-
JES)
Submitted: October 22, 2013 Decided: October 25, 2013
Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Eunice Husband, Appellant Pro Se. David Earl Godwin, Assistant
United States Attorney, Clarksburg, West Virginia; Michael D.
Stein, Assistant United States Attorney, Wheeling, West
Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Eunice Husband seeks to appeal the denial of relief on
his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2013) motion. The district
court referred this case to a magistrate judge pursuant to 28
U.S.C.A. § 636(b)(1)(B) (West 2006 & Supp. 2013). The
magistrate judge recommended that relief be denied and advised
Husband that the 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. Arm, 474 U.S. 140 (1985).
Husband has waived appellate review by failing to file
objections 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