Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca4-15-07844/USCOURTS-ca4-15-07844-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 530
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Habeas Corpus
Cause of Action: 

---

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-7844

DEMARIS L. GRICE,

Petitioner - Appellant,

v.

FRANK L. PERRY,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western 

District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Frank D. Whitney,

Chief District Judge. (3:14-cv-00425-FDW)

Submitted: June 28, 2016 Decided: July 5, 2016

Before NIEMEYER and AGEE, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior 

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Demaris L. Grice, Appellant Pro Se. Clarence Joe DelForge, III, 

NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Raleigh, North Carolina, 

for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 15-7844 Doc: 16 Filed: 07/05/2016 Pg: 1 of 3
2

PER CURIAM:

Demaris L. Grice 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 (2007).

The district court’s final judgment was entered on the 

docket on November 26, 2014. The notice of appeal was filed, at 

the earliest, on November 13, 2015.* Because Grice failed to 

file a timely notice of appeal 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 

 * For the purpose of this appeal, we assume that the date 

appearing on the notice of appeal is the earliest date it could 

have been properly delivered to prison officials for mailing to 

the court. Fed. R. App. P. 4(c); Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266 

(1988).

Appeal: 15-7844 Doc: 16 Filed: 07/05/2016 Pg: 2 of 3
3

before this court and argument would not aid the decisional 

process.

DISMISSED

Appeal: 15-7844 Doc: 16 Filed: 07/05/2016 Pg: 3 of 3