Sherman Graham v. Joseph McFadden


UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 1:14-cv-01680-TMC. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999588653]. Mailed to: Sherman Graham. [15-6256]

Download PDF
Appeal: 15-6256 Doc: 9 Filed: 05/22/2015 Pg: 1 of 2 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-6256 SHERMAN GRAHAM, Petitioner - Appellant, v. JOSEPH MCFADDEN, Warden, Lieber Correctional Institution, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Aiken. Timothy M. Cain, District Judge. (1:14-cv—01680-TMC) Submitted: May 19, 2015 Decided: May 22, 2015 Before NIEMEYER and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Sherman Graham, Appellant Pro Se. Donald John Zelenka, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Kaycie Smith Timmons, Assistant Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Appeal: 15-6256 Doc: 9 Filed: 05/22/2015 Pg: 2 of 2 PER CURIAM: Sherman Graham 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 relief be (2012). denied The and magistrate advised judge Graham 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 Cir. 1985); also Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985). Graham has waived appellate review objections proper by failing notice. to timely file Accordingly, we deny a after receiving 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?