Michael McKnight v. South Carolina, The State Of
Filing
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 2:15-cv-03149-MBS. Copies to all parties and the district court. [999975654]. Mailed to: Michael McKnight. [16-7081]
Appeal: 16-7081
Doc: 8
Filed: 11/28/2016
Pg: 1 of 2
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 16-7081
MICHAEL TYRELL MCKNIGHT,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
SOUTH CAROLINA, STATE OF,
Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Charleston.
Margaret B. Seymour, Senior
District Judge. (2:15-cv-03149-MBS)
Submitted:
November 22, 2016
Before DIAZ and
Circuit Judge.
THACKER,
Circuit
Decided:
Judges,
November 28, 2016
and
DAVIS,
Senior
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Michael Tyrell McKnight, Appellant Pro Se. Donald John Zelenka,
Senior Assistant Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Appeal: 16-7081
Doc: 8
Filed: 11/28/2016
Pg: 2 of 2
PER CURIAM:
Michael
court’s
order
petition.
judge
Tyrell
McKnight
denying
relief
seeks
on
to
appeal
28
U.S.C.
his
the
district
§ 2254
(2012)
The district court referred this case to a magistrate
pursuant
to
28
U.S.C.
§ 636(b)(1)(B)
(2012).
The
magistrate judge recommended that relief be denied and advised
McKnight that failure to timely file specific 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,
845-46
U.S.
140
(4th
Cir.
(1985).
1985);
McKnight
has
also
waived
appellate review by failing to file specific objections after
receiving proper notice.
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?