Hamlet v. Page

Filing 920060929

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-6530

TIMOTHY L. HAMLET, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus JAMES PAGE, Deputy; CHARLENE WILSON, Sergeant, Defendants - Appellees, and KEVIN WASHINGTON, Sheriff of WCSD; WILLIAMSBURG COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT, Defendants.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Florence. R. Bryan Harwell, District Judge. (4:04-cv-22051-RBH)

Submitted: September 26, 2006

Decided: September 29, 2006

Before WIDENER and WILKINSON, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Timothy L. Hamlet, Appellant Pro Se. Benjamin Albert Baroody, AIKEN, BRIDGES, NUNN, ELLIOTT & TYLER, PA, Florence, South

Carolina; Robert E. Lee, MCLAIN LAW FIRM, Florence, South Carolina, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

- 2 -

PER CURIAM: Timothy L. Hamlet seeks to appeal the district court's order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. 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 Hamlet 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, Hamlet failed to timely 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). Hamlet has waived appellate review by failing to

timely file specific objections after receiving proper notice. Accordingly, we affirm. 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 -