Rahsaan Ivey v. Warden Broad River Correctiona

Filing 920090511

Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-8527 RAHSAAN D. IVEY, Petitioner - Appellant, v. WARDEN, BROAD RIVER CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION; HENRY MCMASTER, 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. Margaret B. Seymour, District Judge. (2:06-cv-02257-MBS) Submitted: April 22, 2009 Decided: May 11, 2009 Before TRAXLER, KING, and AGEE, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Rahsaan D. Ivey, Appellant Pro Se. Donald John Zelenka, Deputy Attorney General, Derrick K. McFarland, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF SOUTH CAROLINA, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Rahsaan D. Ivey seeks to appeal the district court's order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. 2254 (2006) petition. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. A certificate of appealability 28 U.S.C. 2253(c)(1) (2006). will not issue absent "a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right." 28 U.S.C. by 2253(c)(2) (2006). that A prisoner satisfies would this find standard demonstrating reasonable jurists that any assessment of the constitutional claims by the district court is debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by the district court is likewise debatable. Miller- El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Ivey has not made the requisite showing as to the first two issues raised in his informal brief. Concerning Ivey's relief informal be the third the and fourth judge and issues raised in brief, as magistrate issues recommended Ivey that that denied to these advised failure to file timely objections to this recommendation could waive appellate review of a district court order based upon the 2 recommendation. Despite this warning, Ivey failed to object to the magistrate judge's recommended disposition of these issues. "[T]o preserve for appeal an issue in a magistrate judge's report, a party must object to the finding or recommendation on that issue with sufficient specificity so as reasonably to alert the district court of the true grounds for the objection." (4th Cir. 2007). issues by failing United States v. Midgett, 478 F.3d 616, 622 Ivey has waived appellate review of these to timely file specific objections after receiving proper notice of the need to do so. Accordingly, and dismiss the appeal. we deny a certificate of appealability 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 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?