James Travis v. Warden , 697 F. App'x 149 ( 2017 )


Menu:
  •                                        UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 17-6735
    JAMES TRAVIS,
    Petitioner - Appellant,
    v.
    WARDEN; ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND,
    Respondents - Appellees.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt.
    Theodore D. Chuang, District Judge. (8:15-cv-02733-TDC)
    Submitted: August 24, 2017                                        Decided: August 29, 2017
    Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and SHEDD and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    James Travis, Appellant Pro Se. Edward John Kelley, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY
    GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    PER CURIAM:
    James Travis seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his 
    28 U.S.C. § 2254
     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 April 28, 2017. Travis
    deposited his notice of appeal in the prison’s internal mailing system at the earliest on
    May 31, 2017. See Fed. R. App. P. 4(c); Houston v. Lack, 
    487 U.S. 266
    , 276 (1988).
    Because Travis 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
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 17-6735

Citation Numbers: 697 F. App'x 149

Judges: Diaz, Gregory, Per Curiam, Shedd

Filed Date: 8/29/2017

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 10/19/2024