Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jeffrey Dennard MCNEAIR, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2000-10-19
Citations: 27 F. App'x 144
Docket Number: No. 00-6646
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Jeffrey Dennard MCNEAIR, Defendant—Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 27
Pages: 144–145

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Jeffrey Dennard MCNEAIR, Defendant—Appellant.
No. 00-6646.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted Sept. 29, 2000.
Decided Oct. 19, 2000.
Jeffrey Dennard McNeair, Appellant Pro Se.
Paul Alexander Weinman, Assistant United States Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Before LUTTIG, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Jeffrey Dennard McNeair appeals the district court's order denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2000). McNeair'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 McNeair that the failure to file and serve timely objections to this recommendation could waive appellate review of a district court order based upon the recommendation. Despite this warning, McNeair failed to serve his objections to the magistrate judge's recommendation on the Appellee. The timely filing and service 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 do so will waive appellate review. See 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). McNeair has waived appellate review by failing to file and serve objections after receiving proper notice and an extension of time to do so. 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