Filed: Nov. 29, 2010
Latest Update: Feb. 21, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-6043 CLIFTON SINGLETARY, Petitioner - Appellant, v. STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA; WARDEN OF LEE CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Rock Hill. Margaret B. Seymour, District Judge. (0:09-cv-00401-MBS) Submitted: November 18, 2010 Decided: November 29, 2010 Before SHEDD and AGEE, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Di
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-6043 CLIFTON SINGLETARY, Petitioner - Appellant, v. STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA; WARDEN OF LEE CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Rock Hill. Margaret B. Seymour, District Judge. (0:09-cv-00401-MBS) Submitted: November 18, 2010 Decided: November 29, 2010 Before SHEDD and AGEE, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Dis..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 10-6043
CLIFTON SINGLETARY,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA; WARDEN OF LEE CORRECTIONAL
INSTITUTION,
Respondents - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Rock Hill. Margaret B. Seymour, District
Judge. (0:09-cv-00401-MBS)
Submitted: November 18, 2010 Decided: November 29, 2010
Before SHEDD and AGEE, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Clifton Singletary, Appellant Pro Se. James Anthony Mabry,
Assistant Attorney General, Donald John Zelenka, Deputy
Assistant Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for
Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Clifton Singletary seeks to appeal the district
court’s order denying relief on 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.
2010). The magistrate judge recommended that relief be denied
and advised Singletary 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,
766 F.2d 841, 845-46 (4th
Cir. 1985); see also Thomas v. Arn,
474 U.S. 140 (1985).
Singletary has waived appellate review by failing to file
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 the court and argument would not aid the decisional
process.
DISMISSED
2