Richard Williams v. Commonwealth of Virginia

USCA4 Appeal: 21-6666 Doc: 10 Filed: 08/24/2021 Pg: 1 of 2
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 21-6666
RICHARD LEO WILLIAMS,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA,
Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at
Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, Senior District Judge. (1:18-cv-00958-CMH-JFA)
Submitted: August 19, 2021 Decided: August 24, 2021
Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, FLOYD, and RUSHING, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Richie Leo Williams, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 21-6666 Doc: 10 Filed: 08/24/2021 Pg: 2 of 2
PER CURIAM:
Richard Leo Williams 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 February 3, 2021. Williams filed the notice
of appeal on April 6, 2021. * Because Williams 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
*
For the purpose of this appeal, we assume that the date appearing on the notice of
appeal is the earliest date Williams could have delivered the notice to prison officials for
mailing to the court. Fed. R. App. P. 4(c)(1); Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266, 276 (1988).
2