Case Name: Christopher GALE, Petitioner-Appellant, v. WARDEN OF PERRY CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION, Respondent-Appellee, and Jon Ozmint, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2009-02-26
Citations: 313 F. App'x 647
Docket Number: No. 08-8312
Parties: Christopher GALE, Petitioner—Appellant, v. WARDEN OF PERRY CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION, Respondent—Appellee, and Jon Ozmint, Respondent.
Judges: Before WILKINSON, DUNCAN, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 313
Pages: 647–648

Head Matter:
Christopher GALE, Petitioner—Appellant, v. WARDEN OF PERRY CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION, Respondent—Appellee, and Jon Ozmint, Respondent.
No. 08-8312.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Feb. 19, 2009.
Decided: Feb. 26, 2009.
Christopher Gale, Appellant Pro Se.
Before WILKINSON, DUNCAN, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Christopher Gale seeks to appeal the district court's order adopting the report and recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000). 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)). Accord Bowles v. Russell, 551 U.S. 205, -, 127 S.Ct. 2360, 2363-66,168 L.Ed.2d 96 (2007).
The district court's order was entered on the docket on September 2, 2008. The notice of appeal was filed, at the earliest, on October 8, 2008. Because Gale failed to file a timely notice of appeal or to obtain an extension or reopening of the appeal period, we dismiss the appeal. We deny Gale leave to proceed in forma pauperis, and 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.
See Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266, 276, 108 S.Ct. 2379, 101 L.Ed.2d 245 (1988).