Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Demetrius HILL, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2017-04-28
Citations: 687 F. App'x 273
Docket Number: No. 16-7729
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Demetrius HILL, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before MOTZ, DUNCAN, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 687
Pages: 273–274

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Demetrius HILL, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 16-7729
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: April 25, 2017
Decided: April 28, 2017
Demetrius Hill, Appellant Pro Se.
John Mcrae AIsup, Terry Michael Mei-necke, Assistant United States Attorneys, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Before MOTZ, DUNCAN, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Demetrius Hill seeks to appeal the district court's order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion. The district court referred this case to a magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 686(b)(1)(B) (2012). The magistrate judge recommended that relief be denied and advised Hill that the 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, 106 S.Ct. 466, 88 L.Ed.2d 435 (1985). Hill 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 this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED