OpenJurist

48 F3d 1216 Johnson v. L Robinson B N

Gregory R. JOHNSON, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
Bishop L. ROBINSON, Secretary of Public Safety and
Correction Services; Sewall B. Smith, Warden, Maryland
State Penitentiary; Theodore Purnell, Security Chief,
Maryland State Penitentiary; James N. Rollins, Former
Warden, Maryland State Penitentiary; Bernard Smith, Former
Assistant Warden and Acting Warden, Maryland State
Penitentiary; Hollis Thompson, Major, Former Security
Chief, Maryland State Penitentiary; James Sanders, Major,
Former Security Chief and Acting Assistant Warden, Maryland
State Penitentiary; William Jednorski, Major, Former Acting
Security Chief, Maryland State Penitentiary, In their
individual and official capacities, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 93-7272.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted Feb. 16, 1995.
Decided March 2, 1995.

48 F.3d 1216
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.

Gregory R. Johnson, appellant pro se. Glenn William Bell, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, MD, for appellees.

Before HAMILTON and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and CHAPMAN, Senior Circuit Judge.

PER CURIAM:

1

Appellant appeals the district court's order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983 (1988) complaint. Appellant's case was referred to a magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Sec. 636(b)(1)(B) (1988). The magistrate judge recommended that relief be denied on Appellant's claim concerning prison living conditions and that relief be granted on Appellant's claim of exposure to a pervasive risk of harm. The magistrate judge advised Appellant that failure to file timely objections to this recommendation could waive appellate review of a district court order based on the recommendation. Despite this warning, Appellant failed to object to the magistrate judge's recommendation. The district court granted judgment for Appellees, adopting the portion of the magistrate judge's recommendation concerning conditions of confinement, but also finding that Appellant was not entitled to relief on his claim of exposure to a pervasive risk of harm.

2

To the extent that Appellant challenges the district court's grant of summary judgment for Appellees on the issue of exposure to a pervasive risk of harm, our review of the district court's opinion discloses that this appeal is without merit. Appellant has waived appellate review of the district court's order adopting the magistrate judge's recommendation and denying relief on the living conditions claim because Appellant failed to file objections after receiving proper notice. Wright v. Collins, 766 F.2d 841, 845-46 (4th Cir.1985); see generally Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985).

3

Accordingly, we affirm the district court's order. Johnson v. Robinson, No. CA-91-2347-H (D. Md. Oct. 22, 1993). 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.

AFFIRMED