George Kennedy v. Broad River Correction Inst

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 4:11-cv-02294-JMC Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998925021]. Mailed to: George Kennedy. [12-6849]

Appeal: 12-6849

Doc: 6

Filed: 08/27/2012

Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 12-6849

GEORGE KENNEDY,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
BROAD RIVER CORRECTION INST, Warden,
Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Florence.
J. Michelle Childs, District
Judge. (4:11-cv-02294-JMC)

Submitted:

August 22, 2012

Decided: August 27, 2012

Before WILKINSON, GREGORY, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

George Kennedy, Appellant Pro Se.
Brendan McDonald, OFFICE OF
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF SOUTH CAROLINA, Donald John Zelenka,
Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for
Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 12-6849

Doc: 6

Filed: 08/27/2012

Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:
George Kennedy seeks to appeal the district court’s
order dismissing

his

28

U.S.C.

§ 2254

(2006)

petition.

The

district court referred this case to a magistrate judge pursuant
to 28 U.S.C.A. § 636(b)(1)(B) (West 2006 & Supp. 2012).

The

magistrate judge recommended that the petition be dismissed for
failure to prosecute and advised Kennedy that failure to file
timely objections to this recommendation could waive appellate
review of a district court order based upon the recommendation.
The
magistrate

timely

judge’s

filing

of

specific

recommendation

is

objections

necessary

to

to

a

preserve

appellate review of the substance of that recommendation when
the

parties

have

1985);

Kennedy

has

warned

of

the

consequences

of

Wright v. Collins, 766 F.2d 841, 845-46 (4th

noncompliance.
Cir.

been

see

also

waived

Thomas v.
appellate

Arn,

474

review

by

objections after receiving proper notice.

U.S.

140

failing

(1985).
to

file

Accordingly, we deny

a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal.
We dispense with oral argument because the facts and
legal
before

contentions
the

court

are

adequately

and

argument

presented

would

not

in
aid

the
the

materials
decisional

process.

DISMISSED
2