Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Stanton v. Witkowski, 4th Cir. (1996)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    2 views2 pages
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissing an appeal from James Robert Stanton, the appellant. Stanton had filed a §2254 motion in district court that was referred to a magistrate judge, who recommended denying relief. Stanton did not file any objections to the magistrate's recommendation, though he was warned that failing to do so could waive his right to appellate review. As Stanton did not object after receiving proper notice, the Fourth Circuit finds that he waived his right to appellate review and dismisses his appeal.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1996-05-31 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 95-7971

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissing an appeal from James Robert Stanton, the appellant. Stanton had filed a §2254 motion in district court that was referred to a magistrate judge, who recommended denying relief. Stanton did not file any objections to the magistrate's recommendation, though he was warned that failing to do so could waive his right to appellate review. As Stanton did not object after receiving proper notice, the Fourth Circuit finds that he waived his right to appellate review and dismisses his appeal.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    2 views2 pages

    Stanton v. Witkowski, 4th Cir. (1996)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissing an appeal from James Robert Stanton, the appellant. Stanton had filed a §2254 motion in district court that was referred to a magistrate judge, who recommended denying relief. Stanton did not file any objections to the magistrate's recommendation, though he was warned that failing to do so could waive his right to appellate review. As Stanton did not object after receiving proper notice, the Fourth Circuit finds that he waived his right to appellate review and dismisses his appeal.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    of 2

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 95-7971

    JAMES ROBERT STANTON,


    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    versus
    STANLEY R. WITKOWSKI, Warden, Perry Correctional Institution; ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE
    STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA,
    Defendants - Appellees.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    South Carolina, at Rock Hill. Dennis W. Shedd, District Judge.
    (CA-95-2061-19BD)
    Submitted:

    May 16, 1996

    Decided:

    May 31, 1996

    Before RUSSELL, LUTTIG, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.


    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    James Robert Stanton, Appellant Pro Se. Donald John Zelenka, Chief
    Deputy Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Appellant appeals the district court's order denying his 28
    U.S.C. 2254 (1988) motion. Appellant's case was referred to a
    magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1)(B) (1988). The
    magistrate judge recommended that relief be denied and advised
    Appellant 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, Appellant
    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. See Wright v.
    Collins, 766 F.2d 841, 845-46 (4th Cir. 1985); United States v.
    Schronce, 727 F.2d 91, 93-94 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 467 U.S.
    1208 (1984); see also Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985). Appellant
    has waived appellate review by failing to file objections after
    receiving proper notice. We accordingly 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

    You might also like