UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 16-7294
RODETRICK LAMONT GODFREY,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
DIRECTOR OF DEPT OF CORRECTIONS,
Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Arenda L. Wright Allen,
District Judge. (2:12-cv-00093-AWA-RJK)
Submitted: December 20, 2016 Decided: December 22, 2016
Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and WYNN and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Rodetrick Lamont Godfrey, Appellant Pro Se. Alice Theresa
Armstrong, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond,
Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Rodetrick Lamont Godfrey seeks to appeal the district
court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2012)
petition and his motion for relief from judgment under Fed. R.
Civ. P. 60(b). The district court referred this case to a
magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) (2012).
The magistrate judge recommended that relief be denied and
advised Godfrey that 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). Godfrey has waived
appellate review by failing to file objections after receiving
proper notice. Accordingly, we deny leave to proceed in forma
pauperis, 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