Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Dennis Everette ROSS, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2006-04-25
Citations: 177 F. App'x 321
Docket Number: No. 05-7826
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Dennis Everette ROSS, Defendant—Appellant.
Judges: Before MICHAEL, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 177
Pages: 321–321

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Dennis Everette ROSS, Defendant—Appellant.
No. 05-7826.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted April 20, 2006.
Decided April 25, 2006.
Dennis Everette Ross, Appellant Pro Se. Angela Hewlett Miller, Office of the United States Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Before MICHAEL, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Dennis Everette Ross seeks to appeal the district court's order denying his motion for correction of sentence pursuant to Fed.R.Crim.P. 36. In a criminal case, the defendant must file his notice of appeal within ten days after the entry of the district court's final order. Fed. R.App. P. 4(b). The 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 final order in this case was entered on October 14, 2005. Even giving Ross the benefit of Fed. R.App. P. 4(c), his notice of appeal is deemed filed on November 7, 2005—out-side the ten-day appeal period. Because Ross failed to file a timely notice of appeal and did not obtain an extension of time to appeal, 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.