DocketNumber: 97-7205
Filed Date: 12/10/1997
Status: Non-Precedential
Modified Date: 10/30/2014
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 97-7205 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus JAMES CAPRS, a/k/a Patrick Cobbs, a/k/a Rock, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern Dis- trict of West Virginia, at Clarksburg. Irene M. Keeley, District Judge. (CR-94-84-K, CA-96-152-1) Submitted: November 20, 1997 Decided: December 10, 1997 Before MURNAGHAN, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. James Caprs, Appellant Pro Se. Samuel Gerald Nazzaro, Jr., Assis- tant United States Attorney, Wheeling, West Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Appellant filed an untimely notice of appeal. We dismiss for lack of jurisdiction. The time periods for filing notices of appeal are governed by Fed. R. App. P. 4. These periods are "mandatory and jurisdictional." Browder v. Director, Dep't of Corrections,434 U.S. 257
, 264 (1978) (quoting United States v. Robinson,361 U.S. 220
, 229 (1960)). Parties to civil actions have sixty days within which to file in the district court notices of appeal from judg- ments or final orders. Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1). The only exceptions to the appeal period are when the district court extends the time to appeal under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5) or reopens the appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(6). The district court entered its order on March 11, 1997; Ap- pellant's notice of appeal was filed on August 25, 1997, which is beyond the sixty-day appeal period. Appellant's failure to note a timely appeal or obtain an extension of the appeal period leaves this court without jurisdiction to consider the merits of Appel- lant's appeal. We therefore deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the mate- rials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. DISMISSED 2