Matthews v. Martin

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 96-6817 WERNER JOSEPH MATTHEWS, Petitioner - Appellant, versus TOM C. MARTIN, Warden/CEO, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Raleigh. W. Earl Britt, District Judge. (CA-95-550-5-BR) Submitted: July 23, 1996 Decided: August 6, 1996 Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Werner Joseph Matthews, Appellant Pro Se. Clarence Joe DelForge, III, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF NORTH CAROLINA, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Appellant noted this appeal outside the thirty-day appeal period established by Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1), failed to obtain an extension of the appeal period within the additional thirty-day period provided by Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5), and is not entitled to relief under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(6). The time periods for filing notices of appeal are governed by Fed. R. App. P. 4. These periods are "mandatory and jurisdictional." Browder v. Director, Dep't of Corrections, 434 U.S. 257, 264 (1978) (quoting United States v. Robinson, 361 U.S. 220, 229 (1960)). The district court entered its order on April 16, 1996; Appellant's notice of appeal was filed at the earliest on May 17, 1996. Appellant's failure to note a timely appeal or obtain an extension of the appeal period deprives this court of jurisdiction to consider this case. We therefore deny a certificate of probable cause to appeal; to the extent that a cer- tificate of appealability is required, we deny such a certificate, and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the mate- rials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. DISMISSED 2