Court Opinion

ID: 1003460
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2013-07-04 18:26:36.755535+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:09:18.837546
License: Public Domain

UNPUBLISHED

                   UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                       FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                            No. 00-7159

MAURICE L. STROUD,

                                              Plaintiff - Appellant,

          versus

JIM PENDERGRAPH, Sheriff,

                                               Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Graham C. Mullen, Chief
District Judge. (CA-00-140-3-MU)

Submitted:   January 18, 2001             Decided:   January 24, 2001

Before WIDENER and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Maurice L. Stroud, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

     Maurice L. Stroud seeks to appeal the district court’s order

denying relief on his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp. 2000) com-

plaint.     We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because

Stroud’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. R. App. P. 4(a)(6).      This appeal period is “mandatory and

jurisdictional.”    Browder v. Director, Dep’t of Corrections, 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 May

15, 2000.     Stroud’s notice of appeal was filed on July 24, 2000.

Because he 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 conten-

tions are adequately presented in the materials before the court

and argument would not aid the decisional process.

                                                          DISMISSED

                                  2