U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, 2008

Grate v. Johnson

Grate v. Johnson
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Decided September 16, 2008 · Wilkinson, Niemeyer, Hamilton
293 F. App'x 198

Grate v. Johnson

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Joseph Michael Grate seeks to appeal the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on 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, 98 S.Ct. 556, 54 L.Ed.2d 521 (1978) (quoting United States v. Robinson, 361 U.S. 220, 229, 80 S.Ct. 282, 4 L.Ed.2d 259 (1960)).

The district court’s order was entered on the docket on October 18, 2007, 2007 WL 3053054. The notice of appeal was filed on April 17, 2008. * Because Grate *199 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.

*

For tire purpose of this appeal, we assume that the date appearing on the notice of appeal is the earliest date it could have been properly delivered to prison officials for mailing to the *199 court. Fed.R.App. P. 4(c); Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266, 108 S.Ct. 2379, 101 L.Ed.2d 245 (1988).

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