Case Resources
Search this Case
in Google Scholar
on the Web
Google Web Search
MSN Web Search
Yahoo! Web Search
in the News
Google News Search
Google News Archive Search
Yahoo! News Search
in the Blogs
BlawgSearch.com Search
Google Blog Search
Technorati Blog Search
in other Databases
Google Book Search
Justia Research Resources
Justia.com
Supreme Court Center
US Regulation Tracker
US District Court Opinions
Federal District Court Civil Case Filings
Legal Blog Search
Legal Podcast Search
USA Constitution Annotated
Online Research Resources
Cornell LII
Cornell Wex Dictionary & Encyclopedia
LLRX.com - Legal Research
Expert Witness Directory
Nolo Consumer & Business
US Court Forms
WashLaw Directory
World LII
Cases Provided By
Creative Commons
public.resource.org
Franklin Roosevelt Wallace, Petitioner--appellant, v. United States of America, Respondent--appellee
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit. - 815 F.2d 74Unpublished Disposition
Submitted Jan. 30, 1987.Decided March 26, 1987
Before ERVIN, CHAPMAN, and WILKINSON, Circuit Judges.
Franklin Roosevelt Wallace, appellant pro se.
Stephen Aubrey West, Office of the United States Attorney, for appellee.
PER CURIAM:
Franklin R. Wallace, a North Carolina inmate under a federal parole violator detainer, appeals the judgment of the district court dismissing his challenge to the federal detainer. The district court referred Wallace's petition to a magistrate pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Sec.636(b)(1). Upon consideration of respondent's motion for summary judgment and after affording Wallace an opportunity to respond, the magistrate filed a report recommending that judgment be granted in favor of respondent and the case dismissed. Wallace was notified that he had ten days in which to file objections to the magistrate's report. See 28 U.S.C. Sec. 636(b)(1)(C). He failed to file objections, and the district court adopted the magistrate's recommendation and dismissed the case.
This Court has held that the failure to file timely objections to a magistrate's report waives appellate review of the substance of that report where the parties have been warned that failure to object will waive appellate review. Wright v. Collins, 766 F.2d 841 (4th Cir. 1985); Carr v. Hutto, 737 F.2d 433 (4th Cir. 1984), cert. denied, --U.S. ----, 54 U.S.L.W. 3392 (Dec. 9, 1985). The use of this procedure has been upheld by the Supreme Court see Thomas v. Arn, --U.S. ----, 54 U.S.L.W. 4032 (Dec. 4, 1985). As Wallace was properly warned, and yet failed to file objections, he has waived his right to appellate review.
Because the dispositive issues recently have been decided authoritatively, we dispense with oral argument and affirm the district court's judgment.
AFFIRMED.