Court Opinion

ID: 1014610
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2013-07-04 21:19:28.750538+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:42:52.603241
License: Public Domain

UNPUBLISHED

                   UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                       FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                            No. 04-6080

JEROME ANTONIO DOSS,

                                             Petitioner - Appellant,

          versus

WARDEN, NOTTOWAY CORRECTIONAL CENTER,

                                              Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of Virginia, at Roanoke. James C. Turk, Senior District
Judge. (CA-03-363)

Submitted:   October 14, 2004             Decided:   October 19, 2004

Before MOTZ, TRAXLER, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Jerome Antonio Doss, Appellant Pro Se. Paul Christopher Galanides,
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for
Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:

           Jerome Antonio Doss 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).1    This appeal period is “mandatory

and jurisdictional.” Browder v. Director, Dep’t of Corr., 434 U.S.

257, 264 (1978) (quoting United States v. Robinson, 361 U.S. 220,

229 (1960)).

           The district court’s order was entered on the docket on

October 31, 2003.   The notice of appeal was filed on December 22,

2003.2   Because Doss failed to file a timely notice of appeal or to

obtain an extension or reopening of the appeal period, we deny

leave to proceed in forma pauperis and dismiss the appeal.       We

dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions

     1
      Even if Doss’s notice of appeal is construed as a motion to
reopen, Doss failed to file his notice of appeal within seven days
of the date he received the judgment. See Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(6).
     2
      For the purposes of this appeal, we assume that the date
appearing on the notice of appeal is the earliest date it could
have been properly delivered to prison officials for mailing to the
court.   See Fed. R. App. P.4(c); Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266
(1988).

                                - 2 -
are adequately presented in the materials before the court and

argument would not aid the decisional process.

                                                     DISMISSED

                              - 3 -