Case Name: Marvin L. SMITH, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CHARLESTON POLICE DEPARTMENT; Civil Service Commissioner for Charleston Police Department, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2001-05-29
Citations: 10 F. App'x 187
Docket Number: No. 01-6513
Parties: Marvin L. SMITH, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CHARLESTON POLICE DEPARTMENT; Civil Service Commissioner for Charleston Police Department, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 10
Pages: 187–188

Head Matter:
Marvin L. SMITH, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CHARLESTON POLICE DEPARTMENT; Civil Service Commissioner for Charleston Police Department, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 01-6513.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted May 17, 2001.
Decided May 29, 2001.
Marvin L. Smith, pro se. Gary Edward Pullin, Theresa Marlene Kirk, Pullin, Knopf, Fowler & Flanagan, Charleston, WV, for appellees.
Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Marvin L. Smith seeks to appeal the district court's order dismissing his civil action filed under 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp.2000). We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because Appellant'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. R-App.P. 4(a)(5) or reopens the appeal period under Fed.RApp.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 June 21, 2000. Smith's notice of appeal was filed on March 28, 2001. Because Smith failed to file a timely notice of appeal or 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.