Sanders v. State of Maryland

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT HENRY T. SANDERS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. No. 97-1996 STATE OF MARYLAND, Defendant-Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Peter J. Messitte, District Judge. (CA-97-1654-PJM) Submitted: January 15, 1998 Decided: July 24, 1998 Before MURNAGHAN and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge. _________________________________________________________________ Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. _________________________________________________________________ COUNSEL Henry T. Sanders, Appellant Pro Se. Margaret Witherup Tindall, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Balti- more, Maryland, for Appellee. _________________________________________________________________ Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). OPINION PER CURIAM: Appellant filed an untimely notice of appeal. We dismiss for lack of jurisdiction. The time periods for filing notices of appeal are gov- erned by Fed. R. App. P. 4. These periods are "mandatory and juris- dictional." Browder v. Director, Dep't of Corrections, 434 U.S. 257, 264 (1978) (quoting United States v. Robinson , 361 U.S. 220, 229 (1960)). A defendant in a criminal action has ten days within which to file in the district court a notice of appeal from a judgment or final order. Fed. R. App. P. 4(b). The only exception to the appeal period is when the district court extends the time to appeal upon showing of excusable neglect. Id. The district court entered its order on June 13, 1997, and denied Appellant's motion for reconsideration on July 2, 1997; Appellant's notice of appeal was filed on July 16, 1997, which is beyond the ten- day appeal period. Appellant's failure to note a timely appeal or obtain an extension of the appeal period leaves this court without jurisdiction to consider the merits of Appellant's appeal. We therefore deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis and dismiss the appeal. We also deny all of Appellant's outstanding motions including his motions for a stay, a preliminary injunction, an interim stay, a vaca- tion, expedited treatment, a conference, summary reversal, sanctions, attorney's fees, remand, "alternatives," "modifications," default, and an evidentiary hearing. 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