Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • United States v. Deshields, 4th Cir. (2004)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    6 views2 pages
    This document is an unpublished order from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissing Melvin Milton Deshields' appeal of the district court's denial of his motion for relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. The district court had referred the case to a magistrate judge who recommended denying relief. Deshields failed to file a timely objection to the magistrate's recommendation, and as a result, the Fourth Circuit held that he waived his right to appellate review and dismissed the appeal.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2004-09-15 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 04-6790

    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    This document is an unpublished order from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissing Melvin Milton Deshields' appeal of the district court's denial of his motion for relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. The district court had referred the case to a magistrate judge who recommended denying relief. Deshields failed to file a timely objection to the magistrate's recommendation, and as a result, the Fourth Circuit held that he waived his right to appellate review and dismissed the appeal.

    Copyright:

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

    United States v. Deshields, 4th Cir. (2004)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document is an unpublished order from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissing Melvin Milton Deshields' appeal of the district court's denial of his motion for relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. The district court had referred the case to a magistrate judge who recommended denying relief. Deshields failed to file a timely objection to the magistrate's recommendation, and as a result, the Fourth Circuit held that he waived his right to appellate review and dismissed the 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    UNPUBLISHED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. 04-6790

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    versus
    MELVIN MILTON DESHIELDS, a/k/a Michael Donovan
    Hayes, a/k/a Chuck, a/k/a Donovan Michael
    Hayes,
    Defendant - Appellant.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle
    District of North Carolina, at Durham. William L. Osteen, District
    Judge. (CR-00-191; CA-03-562-1)

    Submitted:

    September 9, 2004

    Decided:

    September 15, 2004

    Before WILKINSON, MICHAEL, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Melvin Milton Deshields, Appellant Pro Se. Sandra Jane Hairston,


    Assistant United States Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina, for
    Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Melvin Milton Deshields seeks to appeal the district
    courts order denying relief on his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.
    2255 (2000).

    The district court referred this case to a

    magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1)(B) (2000).

    The

    magistrate judge recommended that relief be denied and advised


    Deshields that the failure to file timely objections to this
    recommendation could waive appellate review of a district court
    order

    based

    Deshields

    upon

    the

    failed

    to

    recommendation.
    object

    to

    Despite
    the

    this

    warning,

    magistrate

    judges

    recommendation.
    The timely filing of specific objections to a magistrate
    judges 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); see also
    Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985). Deshields has waived appellate
    review by failing to file 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 before
    the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

    DISMISSED

    - 2 -

    You might also like