Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

In Re: Robert Calvin Craig, Jr., 95-6247 (1995)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 95-6247 Visitors: 19
Filed: Apr. 18, 1995
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: 52 F.3d 320 NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit. In re: Robert Calvin CRAIG, Jr., Plaintiff-Appellant. No. 95-6247. United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit. Submitted: March 15, 1995 Decided: April 18, 1995 Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western Distr
More

52 F.3d 320
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.

In re: Robert Calvin CRAIG, Jr., Plaintiff--Appellant.

No. 95-6247.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: March 15, 1995
Decided: April 18, 1995

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Graham C. Mullen, District Judge. (CA-94-337-3-MU)

Robert Calvin Craig, Appellant Pro Se.

Before RUSSELL and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and CHAPMAN, Senior Circuit Judge.

PER CURIAM:

1

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)). 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.

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