Lamb v. Warden, Nottaway Correctional Center , 6 F. App'x 122 ( 2001 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 00-7549
DAVID WALKER LAMB,
Petitioner - Appellant,
versus
WARDEN, NOTTOWAY CORRECTIONAL CENTER,
Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western Dis-
trict of Virginia, at Roanoke. James C. Turk, District Judge.
(CA-99-668-7)
Submitted: February 9, 2001 Decided: March 12, 2001
Before WILLIAMS, MOTZ, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
David Walker Lamb, Appellant Pro Se. Linwood Theodore Wells, Jr.,
Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
David Walker Lamb seeks to appeal the district court’s order
dismissing his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994
& Supp. 2000). Lamb’s case was referred to a magistrate judge pur-
suant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) (1994). The magistrate judge
recommended that relief be denied and advised Lamb that failure to
file timely objections to this recommendation could waive appellate
review of a district court order based upon the recommendation.
Despite this warning, Lamb failed to object to the magistrate
judge’s 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
that failure to object will waive appellate review. Wright v.
Collins, 766 F.2d 841, 845-46 (4th Cir. 1985); see also Thomas v.
Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985). Lamb has waived appellate review by
failing to file objections after receiving proper notice. We ac-
cordingly 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 the
court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED
2