James McBride v. Commonwealth of Virginia

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 3:09-cv-00716-JRS Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998562014]. Mailed to: McBride. [11-6090]

Case: 11-6090

Document: 13

Date Filed: 04/06/2011

Page: 1

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 11-6090

JAMES H. MCBRIDE,
Plaintiff – Appellant,
v.
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA,
Defendant – Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Richmond.
James R. Spencer, Chief
District Judge. (3:09-cv-00716-JRS)

Submitted:

March 31, 2011

Decided:

April 6, 2011

Before NIEMEYER, SHEDD, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

James H. McBride, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Case: 11-6090

Document: 13

Date Filed: 04/06/2011

Page: 2

PER CURIAM:
James H. McBride appeals the district court’s order
denying his motion to appoint McBride new counsel in a criminal
case pending in state court.

The district court abstained from

deciding the case, pursuant to Younger v. Harris, 401 U.S. 37
(1971). *

The Younger doctrine “permits federal courts to refrain

from hearing cases that would interfere with a pending state
criminal

proceeding.”

(4th Cir. 2007).

Martin

v.

Stewart,

499

F.3d

360,

363

We review for abuse of discretion a district

court’s decision to abstain under Younger, Laurel Sand & Gravel,
Inc. v. Wilson, 519 F.3d 156, 161 (4th Cir. 2008), and find no
abuse of discretion here.
of the district court.

Accordingly, we affirm the decision

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

*

Although McBride did not file timely objections to the
magistrate judge’s report and recommendation, he did pursue the
alternate option suggested by the magistrate judge of filing an
amended complaint.
Thus, McBride’s failure to file objections
did not result in a waiver of his right to appellate review.
cf. United States v. Midgette, 478 F.3d 616, 621-22 (4th Cir.
2007) (holding a party waives appellate review by failing to
file timely and specific objections to a magistrate judge’s
report).

2