Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca4-16-06165/USCOURTS-ca4-16-06165-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Chaztanious Blackburn
Appellant
Timothy McKoy
Appellee

Document Text:

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-6165

CHAZTANIOUS BLACKBURN,

 Petitioner – Appellant,

v.

TIMOTHY MCKOY, Superintendent, Franklin Correctional 

Center,

 Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western 

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

Chief District Judge. (5:15-cv-00082-FDW)

Submitted: April 21, 2016 Decided: April 26, 2016

Before WILKINSON, KING, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Chaztanious Blackburn, Appellant Pro Se. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 16-6165 Doc: 10 Filed: 04/26/2016 Pg: 1 of 3
2

PER CURIAM:

Chaztanious Blackburn 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 order was entered on the docket on 

August 4, 2015. The notice of appeal was filed on January 5, 

2016.* Because Blackburn 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, deny a 

certificate of appealability, and dismiss the appeal. We 

dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal 

 * 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: 16-6165 Doc: 10 Filed: 04/26/2016 Pg: 2 of 3
3

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before 

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED

Appeal: 16-6165 Doc: 10 Filed: 04/26/2016 Pg: 3 of 3