Case Name: John Henry SINGLETON, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Sherwood R. MCCABE, Respondent-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2004-10-27
Citations: 112 F. App'x 277
Docket Number: No. 04-7280
Parties: John Henry SINGLETON, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Sherwood R. MCCABE, Respondent-Appellee.
Judges: Before WILLIAMS and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 112
Pages: 277–278

Head Matter:
John Henry SINGLETON, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Sherwood R. MCCABE, Respondent-Appellee.
No. 04-7280.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Oct. 18, 2004.
Decided: Oct. 27, 2004.
John Henry Singleton, Appellant pro se.
Clarence Joe DelForge, III, North Carolina Department of Justice, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Before WILLIAMS and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
John Henry Singleton seeks to appeal the district court's order dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition as untimely. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the notice of appeal was not timely filed.
Parties are accorded thirty days after the entry of the district court's final judgment or order to note an appeal, 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 Corr., 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 April 30, 2004. The notice of appeal was filed on July 9, 2004. Because Singleton failed to file a timely notice of appeal or to obtain an extension or reopening of the appeal period, we 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
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. See Fed. R.App. P. 4(c)(1); Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266, 108 S.Ct. 2379, 101 L.Ed.2d 245 (1988).