Filed: Mar. 22, 2002
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-7911 JOSEPH VEREEN, Petitioner - Appellant, versus STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA; CHARLES M. CONDON, Attorney General of the State of South Carolina, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Charleston. Patrick Michael Duffy, District Judge. (CA-99-3984-2-23AJ) Submitted: March 14, 2002 Decided: March 22, 2002 Before NIEMEYER and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTO
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-7911 JOSEPH VEREEN, Petitioner - Appellant, versus STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA; CHARLES M. CONDON, Attorney General of the State of South Carolina, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Charleston. Patrick Michael Duffy, District Judge. (CA-99-3984-2-23AJ) Submitted: March 14, 2002 Decided: March 22, 2002 Before NIEMEYER and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 01-7911
JOSEPH VEREEN,
Petitioner - Appellant,
versus
STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA; CHARLES M. CONDON,
Attorney General of the State of South
Carolina,
Respondents - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Charleston. Patrick Michael Duffy, District
Judge. (CA-99-3984-2-23AJ)
Submitted: March 14, 2002 Decided: March 22, 2002
Before NIEMEYER and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Joseph Vereen, Appellant Pro Se. Donald John Zelenka, Chief Deputy
Attorney General, Jeffrey Alan Jacobs, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY
GENERAL, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Joseph Vereen seeks to appeal the district court’s order
granting summary judgment to the Appellees and denying relief on
his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 & Supp.
2001). We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because
Vereen’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 March
29, 2001. Vereen’s notice of appeal was signed on September 24,
2001. Because Vereen 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
2