Case ID: f-appx_697/html/0185-01.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

Otis T. MADISON, Petitioner-Appellant, v. DIRECTOR OF the VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, Respondent-Appellee.
    No. 16-6831
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: August 24, 2017
    Decided: September 8, 2017
    Otis T. Madison, Appellant Pro Se. Aaron Jennings Campbell, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.
    Before WILKINSON, KING, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.
   Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Otis T. Madison seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2012) petition. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the notice of appeal was not timely filed.

Parties are accorded 30 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). “[T]he timely filing of a notice of appeal in a civil case is a jurisdictional requirement.” Bowles v. Russell, 551 U.S. 205, 214, 127 S.Ct. 2360, 168 L.Ed.2d 96 (2007).

The district court’s order was entered on the docket on May 6, 2016. The district court found on limited remand from this court that Madison handed his notice of appeal to prison officials for mailing on June 10, 2016, and, thus, that the notice of appeal was not timely filed under Fed. R. App. P. 4(c)(1): We review this factual finding for clear error, see Ray v. Clements, 700 F.3d 993, 1012 (7th Cir. 2012), and we discern no such error. Thus, Madison filed the notice of appeal, beyond the 30-day-appeal period.

Because Madison failed to file a timely notice of appeal or to obtain an extension or reopening of the appeal period, we deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not'aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED