Pettengill v. Commonwealth of VA, (4th Cir. 2004)

Text

---

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 03-7422 JOHN S. PETTENGILL, Petitioner - Appellant, versus

COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Samuel G. Wilson, Chief District

Judge. (CA-02-128-7)

Submitted: December 18, 2003 Decided: January 16, 2004

Before LUTTIG, SHEDD, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

John S. Pettengill, Appellant Pro Se. Donald Eldridge Jeffrey,

III, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond,

Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).

- 2 - PER CURIAM: John S. Pettengill seeks to appeal the district court§ 2254 (2000) petition. We dismiss

the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the notice of appeal

was not timely filed. Parties are accorded thirty days after the entry of the district courtÂ’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). This appeal period is “mandatory and jurisdictional.” Browder v. Director, Dep’t of Corr.

, 434 U.S. 257, 264 (1978) (quoting United States v. Robinson

, 361 U.S. 220, 229 (1960)). The district courtÂ’s order was entered on the docket on August 4, 2003. The notice of appeal was filed on September 5,

3. Because Pettengill 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 the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. DISMISSED

---