Court Opinion

ID: 724280
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2012-04-17 08:44:20+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T11:45:57.044234
License: Public Domain

92 F.3d 1180
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit Local Rule 36(c) states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.Werner Joseph MATTHEWS, Petitioner-Appellant,v.Tom C. MARTIN, Warden/CEO, Respondent-Appellee.
No. 96-6817.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted:  July 23, 1996.Decided:  August 6, 1996.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh.  W. Earl Britt, District Judge.  (CA-95-550-5-BR)
Werner Joseph Matthews, Appellant Pro Se.  Clarence Joe DelForge, III, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF NORTH CAROLINA, Raleigh, NC, for Appellee.
E.D.N.C.
APPEAL DISMISSED.
Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:

1
Appellant noted this appeal outside the thirty-day appeal period established by Fed.  R.App. P. 4(a)(1), failed to obtain an extension of the appeal period within the additional thirty-day period provided by Fed.  R.App. P. 4(a)(5), and is not entitled to relief under Fed.  R.App. P. 4(a)(6).  The time periods for filing notices of appeal are governed by Fed.  R.App. P. 4.  These periods are "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 entered its order on April 16, 1996;  Appellant's notice of appeal was filed at the earliest on May 17, 1996.  Appellant's failure to note a timely appeal or obtain an extension of the appeal period deprives this court of jurisdiction to consider this case.  We therefore deny a certificate of probable cause to appeal;  to the extent that a certificate of appealability is required, we deny such a certificate, and 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