United States v. Prieto-Rubi , 433 F. App'x 160 ( 2011 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 11-6222
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
MAURILIO PRIETO-RUBI,
Defendant – Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of Virginia, at Charlottesville. Norman K. Moon,
Senior District Judge. (3:06-cr-00017-nkm-1; 3:09-cv-80186-nkm-
mfu)
Submitted: May 26, 2011 Decided: June 1, 2011
Before KING, SHEDD, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Maurilio Prieto-Rubi, Appellant Pro Se. Ronald Mitchell Huber,
Assistant United States Attorney, Charlottesville, Virginia, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Maurilio Prieto-Rubi seeks to appeal the district
court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West
Supp. 2010) 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. 2010). The magistrate judge recommended that
relief be denied and advised Prieto-Rubi 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. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985).
Prieto-Rubi has waived appellate review by failing to file
objections after receiving proper notice. Accordingly, we deny
Prieto-Rubi’s motion for 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
2
before the court and argument would not aid the decisional
process.
DISMISSED
3