Case ID: f-appx_113/html/0563-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      PER CURIAM:", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Frederick BELCHER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Coby G. PERRY; Captain Powers; Agent Jowers; Agent McGee; M.P. Coker, Defendants-Appellees.
    No. 04-7159.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: Nov. 18, 2004.
    Decided: Nov. 29, 2004.
    Frederick Belcher, Appellant pro se.
    Vinton DeVane Lide, Vinton D. Lide & Associates, Lexington, South Carolina; James Dean Jolly, Jr., Stacey Todd Coffee, Logan, Jolly & Smith, L.L.P., Anderson, South Carolina, for Appellees.
    Before LUTTIG and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).
   PER CURIAM:

Frederick Belcher seeks to appeal the district court’s order granting summary judgment in favor of the Defendants in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) action. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the notice of appeal was not timely filed.

Parties are accorded thirty days after the entry of the district court’s final judgment or order to note an appeal, Fed. R.App. P. 4(a)(1)(A), unless the district court extends the appeal period under Fed. R.App. P. 4(a)(5) or reopens the appeal period under Fed. R.App. P. 4(a)(6). This appeal period is “mandatory and jurisdictional.” Browder v. Director, Dep’t of Corr., 434 U.S. 257, 264, 98 S.Ct. 556, 54 L.Ed.2d 521 (1978) (quoting United States v. Robinson, 361 U.S. 220, 229, 80 S.Ct. 282, 4 L.Ed.2d 259 (1960)).

The district court’s order was entered on the docket on May 17, 2004. The notice of appeal was filed on July 8, 2004. Because Belcher failed to file a timely notice of appeal or to obtain an extension or reopening of the appeal period, we 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