Legg v. Lanham

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-7105 WILLIAM ALLEN LEGG, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus RICHARD A. LANHAM, SR., Warden or Commission- er; CORRECTIONAL OFFICER BIANCA; SERGEANT ANDERSON; CORRECTIONAL OFFICER DICKUS; OTHER STAFF MEMBERS, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Deborah K. Chasanow, District Judge. (CA- 98-993-DKC) Submitted: February 11, 1999 Decided: February 23, 1999 Before ERVIN, NIEMEYER, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. William Allen Legg, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: William Allen Legg filed an untimely notice of appeal. We dismiss for lack of jurisdiction. 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)). Parties to civil actions have thirty days within which to file in the district court notices of appeal from judgments or final orders. Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1). The only exceptions to the appeal period are when the district court extends the time to appeal under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5) or reopens the appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(6). The district court entered its order on April 15, 1998; Legg’s notice of appeal was filed on July 23, 1998, which is beyond the thirty-day appeal period. Legg’s failure to note a timely appeal or obtain an extension of the appeal period leaves this court with- out jurisdiction to consider the merits of his appeal. We there- fore dismiss the appeal and deny Legg’s motion for appointment of counsel. 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