United States v. Thomas , 194 F. App'x 112 ( 2006 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 06-6424
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
MILLARD JAMES THOMAS,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Richmond. Robert E. Payne, District
Judge. (3:01-cr-00285-REP-AL; 3:05-cv-00462-REP)
Submitted: August 4, 2006 Decided: August 16, 2006
Before MICHAEL and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Millard James Thomas, Appellant Pro Se. David T. Maguire, Assistant
United States Attorney, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Millard James Thomas seeks to appeal the district court’s
order dismissing as untimely his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion.
We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the notice
of appeal was not timely filed.
When the United States or its officer or agency is a
party, the notice of appeal must be filed no more than sixty days
after the entry of the district court’s final judgment or order,
Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(B), 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. Dir., Dep’t of Corr.,
434 U.S. 257, 264 (1978) (quoting United States v. Robinson, 361
U.S. 220, 229 (1960)).
The district court’s order was entered on the docket on
December 13, 2005. We deem Thomas’ notice of appeal to have been
filed no earlier than February 21, 2006, the date it was apparently
given to prison officials for mailing. Because Thomas 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
- 2 -