UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 05-6838
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
WILLIAM HORACE JOHNSON, JR.,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle,
District Judge. (CR-04-28-4-1-H; CA-96-178-1)
Submitted: February 16, 2006 Decided: February 21, 2006
Before MICHAEL and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
William Horace Johnson, Jr., Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
William Horace Johnson seeks to appeal the district
court’s order denying his motion under Fed R. Civ. P. 60(b) seeking
reconsideration of the court’s prior order denying habeas relief
under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000). We dismiss the appeal for lack of
jurisdiction because the notice of appeal was not timely filed.
When the United States or its officer or agency is a
party, the notice of appeal must be filed no more than sixty days
after the entry of the district court’s final judgment or order,
Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(B), 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
September 28, 2004. The notice of appeal was filed on March 24,
2005. Because Johnson failed to file a timely notice of appeal or
obtain an extension or reopening of the appeal period, we 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.
DISMISSED
- 2 -