Court Opinion

ID: 9405658
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-06-28 21:01:03.794742+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:20:23.274561
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 23-6279      Doc: 10         Filed: 06/27/2023     Pg: 1 of 2

                                            UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                               No. 23-6279

        DAVID L. ROWLAND, JR.,

                             Petitioner - Appellant,

                      v.

        NORTH CAROLINA,

                             Respondent - Appellee.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at
        Raleigh. Richard E. Myers II, Chief District Judge. (5:22-hc-02210-M)

        Submitted: June 22, 2023                                          Decided: June 27, 2023

        Before HARRIS and HEYTENS, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge.

        Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        David L. Rowland, Jr., Appellant Pro Se.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 23-6279         Doc: 10       Filed: 06/27/2023     Pg: 2 of 2

        PER CURIAM:

               David L. Rowland, Jr., seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing without

        prejudice his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction

        because the notice of appeal was not timely filed.

               In civil cases, parties have 30 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). “[T]he timely filing of a notice of appeal in a civil case is a

        jurisdictional requirement.” Bowles v. Russell, 551 U.S. 205, 214 (2007).

               The district court entered its order on January 30, 2023. Rowland filed the notice

        of appeal on March 7, 2023, which was after the 30-day appeal period expired. * Because

        Rowland 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 contentions are

        adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the

        decisional process.

                                                                                        DISMISSED

               *
                We assume that the date appearing on the notice of appeal is the earliest date
        Rowland could have delivered the notice to prison officials for mailing to the district court.
        See Fed. R. App. P. 4(c)(1); Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266, 276 (1988).

                                                      2