Court Opinion

ID: 1022462
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2013-07-04 23:22:40.572448+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:16:07.348804
License: Public Domain

UNPUBLISHED

                   UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                       FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                            No. 07-6143

JOHNNY PHILLIPS,

                                           Petitioner - Appellant,

          versus

RICHARD E. BAZZLE, Warden; HENRY MCMASTER,
Attorney General of South Carolina,

                                          Respondents - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Anderson.   Terry L. Wooten, District Judge.
(8:05-cv-02072-TLW)

Submitted: April 26, 2007                       Decided: May 3, 2007

Before WILLIAMS, MICHAEL, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Johnny Phillips, Appellant Pro Se. Melody Jane Brown, OFFICE OF
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF SOUTH CAROLINA, Columbia, South Carolina,
for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:

              Johnny Phillips 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).          This appeal period is “mandatory

and jurisdictional.”         Browder v. Dir., 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

September 27, 2006.      The notice of appeal was filed on January 25,

2007.   Because Phillips 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   the    court   and     argument   would   not    aid   the

decisional process.

                                                                       DISMISSED

                                      - 2 -