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Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-7858 JERRY LAMONT LINDSEY, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus R. C. LEE, Warden, Defendant - Appellee.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 Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.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,
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-7858 JERRY LAMONT LINDSEY, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus R. C. LEE, Warden, Defendant - Appellee.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 Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.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UNPUBLISHED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Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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