Case Name: Sidney Jerome PATTON, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Michael YORK, Superintendent, Respondent-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2001-04-18
Citations: 7 F. App'x 265
Docket Number: No. 01-6029
Parties: Sidney Jerome PATTON, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Michael YORK, Superintendent, Respondent-Appellee.
Judges: Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 7
Pages: 265–265

Head Matter:
Sidney Jerome PATTON, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Michael YORK, Superintendent, Respondent-Appellee.
No. 01-6029.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted April 12, 2001.
Decided April 18, 2001.
Sidney Jerome Patton, pro se. Clarence Joe DelForge, III, Office of the Attorney General of North Carolina, Raleigh, NC, for appellee.
Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Sidney Patton appeals the district court's order dismissing his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 & Supp. 2000). Appellant'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 Appellant 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, Appellant 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. Wright v. Collins, 766 F.2d 841, 845-46 (4th Cir.1985); see Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 155, 106 S.Ct. 466, 88 L.Ed.2d 435 (1985). Appellant has waived appellate review by failing to file objections after receiving proper notice. We accordingly 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.