United States v. Crowder

Per Curiam: Appellant appeals from the district court's orders denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (1988) motion. We have reviewed the record and the two recommendations of the magistrate Judge and the district court's opinions accepting those recommendations, and find no reversible error. With respect to the claim of breach of the plea agreement, we affirm on the reasoning of the magistrate Judge as accepted by the district court. United States v. Crowder, Nos. CR-90-126; CA-93-232-2 (M.D.N.C. Feb. 3, 1994; May 4, 1994).* As to the double jeopardy claim, appellant waived review of the dismissal of this by failing to object to the magistrate Judge's recommendation. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 155, 88 L. Ed. 2d 435, 106 S. Ct. 466 (1985). 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.