Cassius Jones v. Harold Clarke
Filing
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 2:14-cv-00306-RAJ-DEM Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999587671].. [15-6034]
Appeal: 15-6034
Doc: 15
Filed: 05/21/2015
Pg: 1 of 2
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 15-6034
CASSIUS L. JONES,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
HAROLD W. CLARKE, Director of the Department of Corrections
for Virginia,
Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Raymond A. Jackson, District
Judge. (2:14-cv-00306-RAJ-DEM)
Submitted:
May 19, 2015
Decided: May 21, 2015
Before NIEMEYER and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Darryl Arthur Parker, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellant. Steven
Andrew Witmer, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Richmond,
Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Appeal: 15-6034
Doc: 15
Filed: 05/21/2015
Pg: 2 of 2
PER CURIAM:
Cassius L. Jones seeks to appeal the district court’s order
denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2012) petition.
The
district court referred this case to a magistrate judge pursuant
to
28
U.S.C.
recommended
§ 636(b)(1)(B)
that
the
(2012).
petition
be
The
dismissed
magistrate
as
judge
untimely
and
advised Jones that failure to file timely objections to this
recommendation could waive appellate review of a district court
order based upon the 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,
see
766
F.2d
841,
845-46
(4th
Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985).
review
notice.
by
failing
to
file
Cir.
1985);
also
Jones has waived appellate
objections
after
receiving
proper
Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and
dismiss the appeal.
We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal
contentions
are
adequately
presented
in
the
materials
before
this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED
2
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?