Case ID: f-appx_31/html/0145-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Joseph VEREEN, Petitioner-Appellant, v. State of SOUTH CAROLINA; Charles M. Condon, Attorney General of the State of South Carolina, Respondents-Appellees.
    No. 01-7911.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted March 14, 2002.
    Decided March 22, 2002.
    Joseph Vereen, Appellant Pro Se. Donald John Zelenka, Chief Deputy Attorney General, Jeffrey Alan Jacobs, Office of the Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees.
    
      Before NIEMEYER and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
    Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
   PER CURIAM.

Joseph Vereen seeks to appeal the district court’s order granting summary judgment to the Appellees and denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 & Supp. 2001). We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because Vereen’s notice of appeal was not timely filed.

Parties are accorded thirty days after entry of the district court’s final judgment or order to note an appeal, see Fed. R.App. P. 4(a)(1), unless the district court extends the appeal period under Fed. RApp. 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 Corrections, 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 March 29, 2001. Vereen’s notice of appeal was signed on September 24, 2001. Because Vereen failed to file a timely notice of appeal or to obtain an extension or reopening of the appeal period, 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.