Ronald Timmons v. Casey Campbell ( 2021 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 21-6586
RONALD TIMMONS,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
CASEY M. CAMPBELL; MARYLAND ATTORNEY GENERAL,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt.
Paul W. Grimm, District Judge. (8:20-cv-00812-PWG)
Submitted: December 21, 2021 Decided: December 22, 2021
Before KING and QUATTLEBAUM, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit
Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Ronald Timmons, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Ronald Timmons seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 28
U.S.C. § 2254 petition. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the notice
of appeal was not timely filed.
In civil cases, parties have 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 entered its order on January 22, 2021. Timmons filed the notice
of appeal at the earliest on March 31, 2021, the date written on his notice of appeal. * See
Fed. R. App. P. 4(c), (d); Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266, 276 (1988). Because Timmons
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
To the extent Timmons’ earlier correspondence to the district court, dated
*
March 3, 2021, could be construed as a notice of appeal, it too was untimely filed.
2