U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, 1996

James E. Gaffney v. S.R. Witkowski, Warden State of South Carolina Attorney General of the State of South Carolina

James E. Gaffney v. S.R. Witkowski, Warden State of South Carolina Attorney General of the State of South Carolina
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Decided September 17, 1996
97 F.3d 1447; 1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 30472; 1996 WL 525480 (Federal Reporter, Third Series)

James E. Gaffney v. S.R. Witkowski, Warden State of South Carolina Attorney General of the State of South Carolina

Opinion

97 F.3d 1447

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit Local Rule 36(c) states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
James E. GAFFNEY, Petitioner-Appellant,
v.
S.R. WITKOWSKI, Warden; State of South Carolina; Attorney
General of the State of South Carolina,
Respondents-Appellees.

No. 96-6492.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted Sept. 5, 1996.
Decided Sept. 17, 1996.

James R. Gaffney, Appellant Pro Se. Donald John Zelenka, Chief Deputy Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees.

Before WIDENER and WILKINS, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge.

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 established by Fed. R.App. P. 4 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 July 1, 1991; Appellant's notice of appeal was filed on January 30, 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 appealability 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.

2

DISMISSED.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.