UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 03-7896
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
FLOYD WEATHERSPOON,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle
District of North Carolina, at Durham. Frank W. Bullock, Jr.,
District Judge. (CR-99-16; CA-02-885)
Submitted: April 29, 2004 Decided: May 4, 2004
Before LUTTIG, WILLIAMS, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Floyd Weatherspoon, Appellant Pro Se. Sandra Jane Hairston,
Assistant United States Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Floyd Weatherspoon seeks to appeal the district court’s
order denying relief on his motion filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2255
(2000). The district court referred this case to a magistrate
judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) (2000). The magistrate
judge recommended that relief be denied and advised Weatherspoon
that the failure to file timely objections to this recommendation
could waive appellate review of a district court order based upon
the recommendation. Despite this warning, Weatherspoon failed to
object to the magistrate judge’s 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 that failure to object will waive appellate review. See
Wright v. Collins, 766 F.2d 841, 845-46 (4th Cir. 1985); see also
Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985). Weatherspoon 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
the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED
- 2 -