Case ID: f-appx_1/html/0144-02.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

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. John BRANNON, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 00-6994.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted Dec. 14, 2000.
    Decided Jan. 8, 2001.
    
      John Brannon, pro se.
    Before WIDENER, WILKINS, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM.

John Edward Brannon seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing his 28 U.S.C.A. 2255 (West Supp.2000) motion as untimely. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because Brannon’s notice of appeal was not timely filed.

Parties are accorded sixty days after entry of the district court’s final judgment or order to note an appeal when the United States is a party, Fed.R.App.P. 4(a)(1), 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 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 14, 2000. Bran-non’s notice of appeal was filed on July 12, 2000. Because Brannon 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.