UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 08-7993
KEITH M. WALTON,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
GENE M. JOHNSON, Director of the Virginia Department of
Corrections,
Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Raymond A. Jackson, District
Judge. (2:08-cv-00062-RAJ-JEB)
Submitted: February 26, 2009 Decided: March 6, 2009
Before NIEMEYER and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges ∗ .
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Keith M. Walton, Appellant Pro Se. Robert H. Anderson, III,
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia,
for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
∗
The opinion is filed by a quorum of the panel pursuant to
28 U.S.C. § 46(d) (2006).
PER CURIAM:
Keith M. Walton 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. § 636(b)(1)(B) (2006). The magistrate
judge recommended that relief be denied and advised Walton 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, Walton 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 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). Walton
has waived appellate review by failing to timely file specific
objections after receiving proper notice. 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