Faris v. Johnson , 182 F. App'x 186 ( 2006 )


Menu:
  •                              UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 06-6214
    RANDAL E. FARIS,
    Petitioner - Appellant,
    versus
    GENE M. JOHNSON, Director,
    Respondent - Appellee.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
    District of Virginia, at Roanoke. James C. Turk, Senior District
    Judge. (7:05-cv-00563-JCT)
    Submitted:   May 16, 2006                   Decided:   May 23, 2006
    Before WILLIAMS, MOTZ, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Randal E. Faris, Appellant Pro Se.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    See Local Rule 36(c).
    PER CURIAM:
    Randal E. Faris seeks to appeal the district court’s
    order denying his 
    28 U.S.C. § 2254
     (2000) petition as untimely
    filed.    We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the
    notice of appeal was not timely filed.
    Parties are accorded thirty days after the entry of the
    district court’s final judgment or order to note an appeal, Fed. R.
    App. P. 4(a)(1)(A), 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 judgment was entered on the docket
    on   October   25,   2005.*     The    notice   of   appeal   was   filed   on
    January 25, 2006.     Because Faris failed to file a timely notice of
    appeal or to 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
    *
    This date gives Faris the benefit of Houston v. Lack, 
    487 U.S. 266
     (1988).
    - 2 -
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 06-6214

Citation Numbers: 182 F. App'x 186

Judges: Motz, Per Curiam, Traxler, Williams

Filed Date: 5/23/2006

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 8/7/2023