The opinion
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 09-7392
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
WILBERT HERMAN BROWN,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of Virginia, at Roanoke. James C. Turk, Senior
District Judge. (7:06-cr-00098-jct-mfu-2; 7:08-cv-80102-jct-
mfu)
Submitted: March 22, 2010 Decided: April 7, 2010
Before WILKINSON and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON,
Senior Circuit Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Wilbert Herman Brown, Appellant Pro Se. Ronald Andrew Bassford,
Thomas Jack Bondurant, Jr., Assistant United States Attorneys,
Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Wilbert Herman Brown seeks to appeal the district
court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West
Supp. 2009) motion. 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 Brown 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,
Brown 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). Brown
has waived appellate review by failing to timely file specific
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
2
before the court and argument would not aid the decisional
process.
DISMISSED
3