Filed: Feb. 11, 2016
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-7426 TASHON SAMPSON, Petitioner - Appellant, v. WARDEN REYNOLDS, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Beaufort. David C. Norton, District Judge. (9:14-cv-04206-DCN) Submitted: January 21, 2016 Decided: February 11, 2016 Before WILKINSON and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Tashon Sampson
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-7426 TASHON SAMPSON, Petitioner - Appellant, v. WARDEN REYNOLDS, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Beaufort. David C. Norton, District Judge. (9:14-cv-04206-DCN) Submitted: January 21, 2016 Decided: February 11, 2016 Before WILKINSON and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Tashon Sampson,..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 15-7426
TASHON SAMPSON,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
WARDEN REYNOLDS,
Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Beaufort. David C. Norton, District Judge.
(9:14-cv-04206-DCN)
Submitted: January 21, 2016 Decided: February 11, 2016
Before WILKINSON and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Tashon Sampson, Appellant Pro Se. Donald John Zelenka, Senior
Assistant Attorney General, Caroline M. Scrantom, OFFICE OF THE
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF SOUTH CAROLINA, Columbia, South Carolina,
for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Tashon Sampson seeks to appeal the district court’s order
dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2012) petition. We dismiss the
appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the notice of appeal was
not timely filed.
Parties are accorded 30 days after the entry of the
district court’s final judgment or order to note an appeal, Fed.
R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(A), 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). “[T]he timely
filing of a notice of appeal in a civil case is a jurisdictional
requirement.” Bowles v. Russell,
551 U.S. 205, 214 (2007).
The district court’s order was entered on the docket on
July 23, 2015. The notice of appeal was filed on September 2,
2015. Because Sampson 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 this court and argument would not aid the
decisional process.
DISMISSED
2