Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Wilson v. Weldon, 4th Cir. (1999)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    7 views2 pages
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissing Cedrick Wilson's appeal of a district court order. The district court had dismissed Wilson's petition for habeas corpus relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Wilson's case was referred to a magistrate judge who recommended denying relief. Wilson failed to file specific objections to the magistrate's recommendation, and as a result waived his right to appellate review of the district court's order adopting the recommendation. The Fourth Circuit therefore dismissed Wilson's appeal.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1999-07-28 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 99-6316

    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    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissing Cedrick Wilson's appeal of a district court order. The district court had dismissed Wilson's petition for habeas corpus relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Wilson's case was referred to a magistrate judge who recommended denying relief. Wilson failed to file specific objections to the magistrate's recommendation, and as a result waived his right to appellate review of the district court's order adopting the recommendation. The Fourth Circuit therefore dismissed Wilson's appeal.

    Copyright:

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

    Wilson v. Weldon, 4th Cir. (1999)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissing Cedrick Wilson's appeal of a district court order. The district court had dismissed Wilson's petition for habeas corpus relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Wilson's case was referred to a magistrate judge who recommended denying relief. Wilson failed to file specific objections to the magistrate's recommendation, and as a result waived his right to appellate review of the district court's order adopting the recommendation. The Fourth Circuit therefore dismissed Wilson's 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. 99-6316

    CEDRICK WILSON,
    Petitioner - Appellant,
    versus
    WILLIE WELDON, Warden; CHARLES MOLONY CONDON,
    Attorney General of the State of South
    Carolina,
    Respondents - Appellees.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    South Carolina, at Charleston. G. Ross Anderson, Jr., District
    Judge. (CA-98-2128-2-AJ)

    Submitted:

    July 22, 1999

    Decided:

    July 28, 1999

    Before ERVIN, HAMILTON, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.

    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.


    Cedrick Wilson, Appellant Pro Se. Donald John Zelenka, Chief Deputy Attorney General, William Edgar Salter, III, OFFICE OF THE
    ATTORNEY GENERAL OF SOUTH CAROLINA, Columbia, South Carolina, for
    Appellees.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Cedrick Wilson seeks to appeal the district courts order dismissing his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. 2254 (West 1994 &
    Supp. 1999).

    Wilsons case was referred to a magistrate judge

    pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1)(B) (1994).

    The magistrate judge

    recommended that relief be denied and advised Wilson that failure


    to file timely objections to this recommendation could waive appellate review of a district court order based upon the recommendation.

    Despite this warning, Wilson failed to file specific objec-

    tions to the 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.
    v. Collins, 766 F.2d 841, 845-46 (4th Cir. 1985).

    Wright

    See generally

    Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985). Appellant has waived appellate
    review by failing to file specific 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