Case ID: f-appx_41/html/0704-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Tony Darnell KINTON, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 02-6812.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted July 18, 2002.
    Decided July 29, 2002.
    
      Tony Darnell Kinton, Appellant Pro Se. Paul Alexander Weinman, Assistant United States Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee.
    Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
    Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
   PER CURIAM.

Tony Darnell Kinton appeals the district court’s judgment denying his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp.2001) petition. Kin-ton’s case was referred to a magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) (1994). The magistrate judge recommended that relief be denied and advised Kinton that failure to file timely objections to this recommendation could waive appellate review of a district court order based upon the recommendation. Despite this warning, Kinton failed to object to the magistrate judge’s recommendation.

The timely filing of 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 that failure to object will waive appellate review. See Wright v. Collins, 766 F.2d 841, 845-46 (4th Cir.1985); see also Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 106 S.Ct. 466, 88 L.Ed.2d 435 (1985). Kinton 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.