Smith v. Charleston Police Department

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-6513 MARVIN L. SMITH, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus CHARLESTON POLICE DEPARTMENT; CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSIONER FOR CHARLESTON POLICE DEPARTMENT, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern Dis- trict of West Virginia, at Charleston. Joseph Robert Goodwin, Dis- trict Judge. (CA-00-13-2) Submitted: May 17, 2001 Decided: May 29, 2001 Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Marvin L. Smith, Appellant Pro Se. Gary Edward Pullin, Theresa Marlene Kirk, PULLIN, KNOPF, FOWLER & FLANAGAN, Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Marvin L. Smith seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing his civil action filed under 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp. 2000). We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction be- cause Appellant’s notice of appeal was not timely filed. Parties are accorded thirty days after entry of the district court’s final judgment or order to note an appeal, see Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1), 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. Director, 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 June 21, 2000. Smith’s notice of appeal was filed on March 28, 2001. Because Smith failed to file a timely notice of appeal or obtain an extension or reopening of the appeal period, we dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal conten- tions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. DISMISSED 2