Case Name: Antwan R. JENKINS, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Ronald ANGELONE, Director of Department of Corrections, Respondent-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2002-01-28
Citations: 24 F. App'x 234
Docket Number: No. 01-7384
Parties: Antwan R. JENKINS, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Ronald ANGELONE, Director of Department of Corrections, Respondent-Appellee.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 24
Pages: 234–235

Head Matter:
Antwan R. JENKINS, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Ronald ANGELONE, Director of Department of Corrections, Respondent-Appellee.
No. 01-7384.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted Jan. 17, 2002.
Decided Jan. 28, 2002.
Antwan R. Jenkins, Appellant Pro Se. John H. McLees, Jr., Office of the Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.
Before WILKINS and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Antwan R. Jenkins seeks to appeal the district court's order denying his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 & Supp.2001) petition. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because Jenkins' 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. 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 Corrections, 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 July 10, 2001. Jenkins' notice of appeal was filed on August 21, 2001. Because Jenkins 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 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.