Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Restoney Robinson v. James B. McMillan Clarence W. Burr, H.B. Griggs, Sgt., Aaron Johnson, S.E. Callahal, Sgt., 90-6338 (1990)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 90-6338 Visitors: 14
Filed: Jul. 20, 1990
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: 911 F.2d 724 Unpublished Disposition NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit. Restoney ROBINSON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. James B. McMILLAN, Clarence W. Burr, H.B. Griggs, Sgt., Aaron Johnson, S.E. Callahal, Sgt., Defendants-Appellees. No. 90-6338. United States Court of Appeals, Four
More

911 F.2d 724
Unpublished Disposition

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
Restoney ROBINSON, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
James B. McMILLAN, Clarence W. Burr, H.B. Griggs, Sgt.,
Aaron Johnson, S.E. Callahal, Sgt., Defendants-Appellees.

No. 90-6338.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted July 9, 1990.
Decided July 20, 1990.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Robert D. Potter, Chief District Judge. (C/A No. 89-350-P)

Restoney Robinson, appellant pro se.

W.D.N.C.

DISMISSED.

Before SPROUSE and WILKINS, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge.

PER CURIAM:

1

Restoney Robinson noted this appeal outside the 30-day appeal period established by Fed.R.App.P. 4(a)(1), and failed to move for an extension of the appeal period within the additional 30-day period provided by Fed.R.App.P. 4(a)(5). The time periods established by Fed.R.App.P. 4 are "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)). Appellant's failure to note a timely appeal or obtain an extension of the appeal period deprives this Court of jurisdiction to consider this case. We therefore 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.

2

DISMISSED.

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