Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 6 views

    Malcolm Muhammad v. Gene Johnson, 4th Cir. (2011)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document summarizes a court case in which Malcolm Muhammad appealed the denial of a preliminary injunction in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. The district court referred the case to a magistrate judge. The magistrate judge recommended denying relief and advised Muhammad that failing to file timely objections could waive appellate review. Muhammad failed to file objections, so the appellate court affirmed the district court's judgment, denying Muhammad's appeal. The appellate court also denied Muhammad's motions to appoint counsel and for injunctive relief.

    Copyright:

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

    You might also like

    Malcolm Muhammad v. Gene Johnson, 4th Cir. (2011)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    6 views3 pages
    This document summarizes a court case in which Malcolm Muhammad appealed the denial of a preliminary injunction in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. The district court referred the case to a magistrate judge. The magistrate judge recommended denying relief and advised Muhammad that failing to file timely objections could waive appellate review. Muhammad failed to file objections, so the appellate court affirmed the district court's judgment, denying Muhammad's appeal. The appellate court also denied Muhammad's motions to appoint counsel and for injunctive relief.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2011-07-06 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 11-6215

    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 summarizes a court case in which Malcolm Muhammad appealed the denial of a preliminary injunction in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. The district court referred the case to a magistrate judge. The magistrate judge recommended denying relief and advised Muhammad that failing to file timely objections could waive appellate review. Muhammad failed to file objections, so the appellate court affirmed the district court's judgment, denying Muhammad's appeal. The appellate court also denied Muhammad's motions to appoint counsel and for injunctive relief.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    6 views3 pages

    Malcolm Muhammad v. Gene Johnson, 4th Cir. (2011)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document summarizes a court case in which Malcolm Muhammad appealed the denial of a preliminary injunction in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. The district court referred the case to a magistrate judge. The magistrate judge recommended denying relief and advised Muhammad that failing to file timely objections could waive appellate review. Muhammad failed to file objections, so the appellate court affirmed the district court's judgment, denying Muhammad's appeal. The appellate court also denied Muhammad's motions to appoint counsel and for injunctive relief.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    of 3

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 11-6215

    MALCOLM MUHAMMAD,
    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    v.
    GENE M. JOHNSON, Director of Virginia Department of
    Corrections; BRYANT WATSON, Warden, Wallens Ridge State
    Prison; A. P. HARVEY, Assistant Warden, Wallens Ridge State
    Prison; MAJOR COMBS, Major of Security at Wallens Ridge
    State Prison; LIEUTENANT COLLINS, Lieutenant at Wallens
    Ridge State Prison; SERGEANT COCHRANE, Sergeant at Wallens
    Ridge State Prison; SERGEANT GREER, Sergeant at Wallens
    Ridge
    State
    Prison;
    CORRECTIONAL
    OFFICER
    CHEEKS,
    Correctional
    Officer;
    CORRECTIONAL
    OFFICER
    FUSION,
    Correctional Officer; INVESTIGATOR MCBRIDE, Investigator; B.
    YOUNG, Sergeant,
    Defendants - Appellees.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
    District of Virginia, at Roanoke.
    Samuel G. Wilson, District
    Judge. (7:10-cv-00395-sgw-mfu)

    Submitted:

    June 30, 2011

    Decided:

    Before WILKINSON, DUNCAN, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    July 6, 2011

    Malcolm Muhammad, Appellant Pro Se.


    Richard Carson Vorhis,
    Senior Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for
    Appellees.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    Malcolm

    Muhammad

    appeals

    the

    district

    courts

    order

    denying his motion for a preliminary injunction in his 42 U.S.C.


    1983 (2006) action.

    The district court referred this case to

    a magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C.A. 636(b)(1)(B) (West


    2006

    &

    relief

    Supp.
    be

    2010).

    denied

    The

    and

    magistrate

    advised

    judge

    Muhammad

    that

    recommended

    that

    failure

    file

    to

    timely objections to this recommendation could waive appellate


    review of a district court order based upon the recommendation.
    The
    magistrate

    timely

    judges

    filing

    of

    specific

    recommendation

    is

    objections

    necessary

    to

    to

    preserve

    appellate review of the substance of that recommendation when


    the

    parties

    have

    noncompliance.
    Cir.

    1985);

    Muhammad
    objections

    warned

    of

    the

    consequences

    of

    Wright v. Collins, 766 F.2d 841, 845-46 (4th

    see

    has

    been

    also

    waived

    after

    Thomas

    v.

    appellate

    receiving

    Arn,

    474

    review

    by

    proper

    notice.

    U.S.

    140

    failing

    (1985).
    to

    Accordingly,

    file
    we

    affirm the judgment of the district court.


    We

    deny

    Muhammads

    motions

    injunctive relief, and to amend.

    to

    appoint

    counsel,

    for

    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.
    AFFIRMED
    3

    You might also like