PUBLISH
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
Filed 2/28/96
FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT
___________________________________
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )
)
Plaintiff-Appellee, )
)
v. ) No. 95-5180
)
CHARLES SAMUEL LANGHAM, )
)
Defendant-Appellant. )
___________________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court for
the Northern District of Oklahoma
(D.C. No. 90-CR-103-C)
_____________________________________
James L. Swartz, Assistant United States Attorney, Tulsa, Oklahoma
for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Charles Langham, pro se.
_____________________________________
Before ANDERSON, TACHA, and KELLY.
_____________________________________
After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined that oral
argument would not materially assist the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P.
34(a); 10th Cir. R. 34.1.9. The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument.
The defendant was convicted of various drug offenses following a guilty plea in July
1991. The conviction and sentence were affirmed on direct appeal in April 1993. On March
23, 1995, the defendant filed a motion for the transcripts of his sentencing hearing at
government expense, contending that he needed the transcripts to prepare a post-conviction
motion pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255. That motion was denied on July 31 and the notice of
appeal was filed on August 21. The defendant has not filed any collateral proceedings
challenging this conviction.
We lack jurisdiction because the notice of appeal was untimely. See Fed. R. App. P.
4(b); United States v. Lanier, 604 F.2d 1157, 1159-60 (8th Cir. 1979).
A timely notice of appeal is both mandatory and jurisdictional. Browder v. Director,
Dept. of Corrections, 434 U.S. 257, 264 (1978).
Accordingly, this appeal is DISMISSED.
-2-