Case Name: Thomas Herbert TAYLOR, Petitioner-Appellant, v. G.L. WOODARD, Respondent-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2002-03-04
Citations: 30 F. App'x 179
Docket Number: No. 01-7621
Parties: Thomas Herbert TAYLOR, Petitioner-Appellant, v. G.L. WOODARD, Respondent-Appellee.
Judges: Before WILKINS, MOTZ, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 30
Pages: 179–179

Head Matter:
Thomas Herbert TAYLOR, Petitioner-Appellant, v. G.L. WOODARD, Respondent-Appellee.
No. 01-7621.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted Feb. 21, 2002.
Decided March 4, 2002.
Thomas Herbert Taylor, Appellant Pro Se.
Before WILKINS, MOTZ, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Thomas Herbert Taylor seeks to appeal the district court's order dismissing his habeas petition. We dismiss this appeal for lack of jurisdiction because Taylor's notice of appeal was not timely filed.
Parties are accorded thirty days after entry of the district court's final judgment or order to note an appeal, see Fed. R.App. P. 4(a)(1), unless the district court extends the appeal period under Fed. RApp. 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 October 23, 1998. Taylor's notice of appeal was filed on August 23, 2001. Because Taylor 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 also deny Taylor's motion for an order directing DNA testing. 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.
We further note that this court has previously dismissed an appeal of this same order on the merits. Taylor v. Woodard, No. 98-7688, 1999 WL 177285 (4th Cir. Mar.31, 1999) (unpublished).