Steven Mahood v. Donnie Ames
Steven Mahood v. Donnie Ames
Opinion
USCA4 Appeal: 24-6888 Doc: 10 Filed: 12/10/2024 Pg: 1 of 2
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 24-6888
STEVEN LEE MAHOOD,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
DONNIE AMES, Superintendent, Mount Olive Correctional Complex,
Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Charleston. Joseph R. Goodwin, District Judge. (2:16-cv-01853)
Submitted: December 5, 2024 Decided: December 10, 2024
Before GREGORY and RICHARDSON, Circuit Judges, and FLOYD, Senior Circuit Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Steven Lee Mahood, Appellant Pro Se. Andrea Nease Proper, Michael Ray Williams, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WEST VIRGINIA, Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. USCA4 Appeal: 24-6888 Doc: 10 Filed: 12/10/2024 Pg: 2 of 2
PER CURIAM:
Steven Lee Mahood seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his
28 U.S.C. § 2254petition. 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 March 28, 2024. Mahood filed the notice of
appeal, at the earliest, on May 8, 2024. Because Mahood failed to file a timely notice of
appeal or to obtain an extension or reopening of the appeal period, we dismiss the appeal.
We also deny his motion for appointment of counsel.
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
2
Reference
- Status
- Unpublished