Mary Penland v. US

Filing 920090319

Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-2326 MARY PENLAND, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., District Judge. (6:07-cv-03977-HMH) Submitted: March 17, 2009 Decided: March 19, 2009 Before TRAXLER, KING, and AGEE, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Mary Penland, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Mary dismissing her Penland civil appeals the district the United court's States. order The action against district court referred this case to a magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1)(B) (2006). The magistrate judge recommended that the complaint be dismissed without prejudice for Penland's failure to perfect service of process and advised Penland that failure to file specific objections to this recommendation would waive appellate review of a district court order based upon object the to recommendation. the dispositive Penland portion did of not the specifically recommendation. The magistrate timely filing of specific is objections to to a judge's recommendation necessary preserve appellate review of the substance of that recommendation when the parties have been warned of the consequences of noncompliance. United States v. Midgette, 478 F.3d 616, 621-22 (4th Cir. 2007); see also Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985). Penland has waived appellate review by failing to file specific objections after receiving proper notice. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court. Further, we deny Penland's motion to void her plea agreement with the Government. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately 2 presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED 3

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?