United States of America v. Marcus Dominic Brooks

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 09-8092
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
MARCUS DOMINIC BROOKS,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern
District of West Virginia, at Martinsburg. Robert E. Maxwell,
Senior District Judge. (3:04-cr-00040-REM-JES-2; 3:07-cv-00170-
REM-JES)
Submitted: January 19, 2010 Decided: January 28, 2010
Before NIEMEYER, KING, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Marcus Dominic Brooks, Appellant Pro Se. Thomas Oliver Mucklow,
Assistant United States Attorney, Martinsburg, West Virginia,
for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 1 of 2 --

2
PER CURIAM:
Marcus Dominic Brooks seeks to appeal the district
court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West
Supp. 2009) motion. The district court referred this case to a
magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) (2006).
The magistrate judge recommended that relief be denied and
advised Brooks that the failure to file timely objections to
this recommendation could waive appellate review of a district
court order based upon the recommendation. Despite this
warning, Brooks failed to file objections to the magistrate
judge’s 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). Brooks
has waived appellate review by failing to timely file specific
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 the
court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED

-- 2 of 2 --