Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca4-16-07035/USCOURTS-ca4-16-07035-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 530
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Habeas Corpus
Cause of Action: 

---

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-7035

BOBBY CLIFTON SETZER, JR.,

 Petitioner – Appellant,

v.

HAROLD W. CLARKE,

 Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Raymond A. Jackson, District 

Judge. (2:15-cv-00517-RAJ-RJK)

Submitted: November 17, 2016 Decided: November 22, 2016

Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and MOTZ and TRAXLER, Circuit 

Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Bobby Clifton Setzer, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Donald Eldridge 

Jeffrey, III, Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, 

for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 16-7035 Doc: 11 Filed: 11/22/2016 Pg: 1 of 2
2

PER CURIAM:

Bobby Clifton Setzer, Jr., 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 magistrate 

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

magistrate judge recommended that relief be denied and advised 

Setzer 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). Setzer has waived appellate 

review by failing to file objections. 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

Appeal: 16-7035 Doc: 11 Filed: 11/22/2016 Pg: 2 of 2