Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Lindsey v. Lee, 01-7858 (2002)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 01-7858 Visitors: 20
Filed: Feb. 27, 2002
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-7858 JERRY LAMONT LINDSEY, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus R. C. LEE, Warden, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Malcolm J. Howard, District Judge. (CA-01-402-5-H) Submitted: February 14, 2002 Decided: February 27, 2002 Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Jerry Lamont Lindsey,
More
                            UNPUBLISHED

                   UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                       FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT


                            No. 01-7858



JERRY LAMONT LINDSEY,

                                            Plaintiff - Appellant,

          versus


R. C. LEE, Warden,

                                               Defendant - Appellee.



Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis-
trict of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Malcolm J. Howard, District
Judge. (CA-01-402-5-H)


Submitted:   February 14, 2002         Decided:     February 27, 2002


Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.


Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.


Jerry Lamont Lindsey, Appellant Pro Se.


Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:

     Jerry Lamont Lindsey seeks to appeal the district court’s

order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp. 2001)

complaint.    We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because

Lindsey’s notice of appeal was not timely filed.

     Parties are accorded thirty days after entry of the district

court’s final judgment or order to note an appeal, see Fed. R. App.

P. 4(a)(1), 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 Corrections, 
434 U.S. 257
, 264 (1978) (quoting United States v. Robinson, 
361 U.S. 220
, 229 (1960)).

     The district court’s order was entered on the docket on May

30, 2001.    Lindsey’s notice of appeal was filed on October 9, 2001.

Because Lindsey 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 materials before

the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.




                                                           DISMISSED




                                   2

Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer