Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca4-07-07221/USCOURTS-ca4-07-07221-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 555
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Prison Condition
Cause of Action: 

---

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 07-7221

DARRELL DEVON HUNTER, 

Plaintiff - Appellant, 

 versus

R. C. TURNER, DHO; SERGEANT HORN; OFFICER

GLENN; TIM RILEY, Warden; BROCK; OFFICER

GRANT, IGC; HERB JOHNS; OFFICER RICE; OFFICER

BISHOP; W. CALHOUN, Sergeant; SERGEANT

JOHNSON; OFFICER CAMPBELL; SERGEANT DAVIS;

OFFICER GOSSETT; CAPTAIN ALEXANDER; DAVID

CAMPBELL, Officer, B1 Shift; K. DAVIS,

Sergeant, B2 night shift, 

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

South Carolina, at Rock Hill. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., District

Judge. (0:06-cv-03406)

Submitted: January 17, 2008 Decided: January 24, 2008

Before TRAXLER, SHEDD, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Darrell Devon Hunter, Appellant Pro Se. John Evans James, III, LEE,

ERTER, WILSON, JAMES, HOLLER & SMITH, Sumter, South Carolina, for

Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 07-7221 Doc: 13 Filed: 01/24/2008 Pg: 1 of 2
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Darrell Devon Hunter appeals the district court’s order

denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. The

district court referred this case to a magistrate judge pursuant to

28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) (2000). The magistrate judge recommended

that relief be denied and advised Hunter that failure to file

timely specific objections to this recommendation could waive

appellate review of a district court order based upon the

recommendation. Despite this warning, Hunter failed to file

specific objections to the magistrate judge’s 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). Hunter has waived appellate review by failing to

timely file specific objections after receiving proper notice.

Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court.

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.

AFFIRMED

Appeal: 07-7221 Doc: 13 Filed: 01/24/2008 Pg: 2 of 2