United States v. Cleveland Griffin , 473 F. App'x 295 ( 2012 )


Menu:
  •                              UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 12-6441
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
    Plaintiff – Appellee,
    v.
    CLEVELAND LAQUINCY GRIFFIN, a/k/a Q,
    Defendant – Appellant.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    South Carolina, at Columbia. Joseph F. Anderson, Jr., District
    Judge. (3:07-cr-00926-JFA-1; 3:10-cv-70281-JFA)
    Submitted:   May 24, 2012                       Decided:   May 31, 2012
    Before MOTZ and    DAVIS,   Circuit   Judges,   and   HAMILTON,   Senior
    Circuit Judge.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Cleveland Laquincy Griffin, Appellant Pro Se. John David Rowell,
    Assistant United States Attorney, Columbia, South Carolina, for
    Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    PER CURIAM:
    Cleveland       LaQuincy        Griffin      seeks     to     appeal     the
    district court’s order denying relief on his 
    28 U.S.C.A. § 2255
    (West Supp. 2011) motion.                We dismiss the appeal for lack of
    jurisdiction because the notice of appeal was not timely filed.
    When the United States or its officer or agency is a
    party, the notice of appeal must be filed no more than sixty
    days after the entry of the district court’s final judgment or
    order, Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(B), 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).                              “[T]he
    timely     filing    of     a   notice     of       appeal   in   a   civil    case    is   a
    jurisdictional requirement.”                Bowles v. Russell, 
    551 U.S. 205
    ,
    214 (2007).
    The district court’s order was entered on the docket
    on April 25, 2011.              The notice of appeal was filed on March 8,
    2012. *    Because Griffin failed to file a timely notice of appeal
    or to obtain an extension or reopening of the appeal period, we
    dismiss the appeal.             We dispense with oral argument because the
    facts     and    legal    contentions       are       adequately      presented   in     the
    *
    For the purpose of this appeal, we assume that the date
    appearing on the notice of appeal is the earliest date it could
    have been properly delivered to prison officials for mailing to
    the court. Fed. R. App. P. 4(c); Houston v. Lack, 
    487 U.S. 266
    (1988).
    2
    materials   before   the   court   and   argument   would   not    aid   the
    decisional process.
    DISMISSED
    3
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 12-6441

Citation Numbers: 473 F. App'x 295

Judges: Davis, Hamilton, Motz, Per Curiam

Filed Date: 5/31/2012

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 8/5/2023