Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Ellington v. Brown, 96-6823 (1996)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 96-6823 Visitors: 19
Filed: Aug. 06, 1996
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 96-6823 THOMAS ADAM ELLINGTON, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, versus FRANK R. BROWN, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, District Judge. (CA-96-245-5-BO) Submitted: July 23, 1996 Decided: August 6, 1996 Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Thomas Adam Ellington,
More
                             UNPUBLISHED

                   UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                       FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT



                             No. 96-6823



THOMAS ADAM ELLINGTON, JR.,

                                             Plaintiff - Appellant,

          versus

FRANK R. BROWN,

                                              Defendant - Appellee.



Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis-
trict of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, District
Judge. (CA-96-245-5-BO)


Submitted:   July 23, 1996                 Decided:   August 6, 1996


Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.


Thomas Adam Ellington, Jr, Appellant Pro Se.


Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

     Appellant noted this appeal outside the thirty-day appeal

period established by Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1), failed to obtain an

extension of the appeal period within the additional thirty-day

period provided by Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5), and is not entitled to

relief under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(6). 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)). The district

court entered its order on April 2, 1996; Appellant's notice of

appeal was filed on May 20, 1996. 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 dis-

miss 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