Case Name: Teresa MILLER, Petitioner-Appellant, v. STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA, Respondent-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2016-11-22
Citations: 670 F. App'x 825
Docket Number: No. 16-6995
Parties: Teresa MILLER, Petitioner-Appellant, v. STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA, Respondent-Appellee.
Judges: Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and MOTZ and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 670
Pages: 825–826

Head Matter:
Teresa MILLER, Petitioner-Appellant, v. STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA, Respondent-Appellee.
No. 16-6995
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: November 17, 2016
Decided: November 22, 2016
Teresa Miller, Appellant Pro Se. Laura Young, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL, Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellee.
Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and MOTZ and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Teresa Miller seeks to appeal the district court's order denying relief on her 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 Miller 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, 106 S.Ct. 466, 88 L.Ed.2d 435 (1985). Miller has waived appellate review by failing to file objections after receiving proper notice. Accordingly, we deny Miller's motions to admit additional evidence and for disclosure of the presentence report, 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