Case Name: Johnny PHILLIPS, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Richard E. BAZZLE, Warden; Henry McMaster, Attorney General of South Carolina, Respondents-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2007-05-03
Citations: 225 F. App'x 118
Docket Number: No. 07-6143
Parties: Johnny PHILLIPS, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Richard E. BAZZLE, Warden; Henry McMaster, Attorney General of South Carolina, Respondents-Appellees.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 225
Pages: 118–118

Head Matter:
Johnny PHILLIPS, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Richard E. BAZZLE, Warden; Henry McMaster, Attorney General of South Carolina, Respondents-Appellees.
No. 07-6143.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: April 26, 2007.
Decided: May 3, 2007.
Johnny Phillips, Appellant Pro Se. Melody Jane Brown, Office of the Attorney General of South Carolina, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees.
Before WILLIAMS, MICHAEL, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Johnny Phillips seeks to appeal the district court's order dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) petition. 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)(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). This appeal period is "mandatory and jurisdictional." Browder v. Dir., 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 September 27, 2006. The notice of appeal was filed on January 25, 2007. Because Phillips 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.