Roger Harrell v. Commonwealth of Virginia

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [999593677-2], updating certificate of appealability status Originating case number: 3:15-cv-00031-REP-RCY Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999658966]. Mailed to: Roger Lee Harrell SUSSEX II STATE PRISON 24427 Musselwhite Drive Waverly, VA 23891-2222. [15-6777]

Appeal: 15-6777

Doc: 8

Filed: 09/14/2015

Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-6777

ROGER LEE HARRELL,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA,
Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Richmond.
Robert E. Payne, Senior
District Judge. (3:15-cv-00031-REP-RCY)

Submitted:

September 9, 2015

Decided:

September 14, 2015

Before SHEDD, WYNN, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Roger Lee Harrell, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 15-6777

Doc: 8

Filed: 09/14/2015

Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:
Roger

Lee

Harrell

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

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) (2012).

magistrate

judge

The magistrate

judge recommended that relief be denied and advised Harrell 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

Thomas v.

F.2d

Arn,

474

841,
U.S.

845-46

(4th

Cir.

140

(1985).

1985);

Harrell

appellate review by failing to file objections.

has

also
waived

Accordingly, we

deny a certificate of appealability, deny leave to proceed in
forma pauperis, 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