United States v. McLean, 4th Cir. (1998)
Uploaded by
Scribd Government DocsUnited States v. McLean, 4th Cir. (1998)
Uploaded by
Scribd Government DocsUNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 98-6462
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
CLEVELAND
Junior,
MCLEAN,
JR.,
a/k/a
June,
a/k/a
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Norfolk. J. Calvitt Clarke, Jr., Senior
District Judge. (CR-90-105, CA-96-424)
Submitted:
June 18, 1998
Decided:
July 8, 1998
Before MURNAGHAN and WILKINS, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Cleveland McLean, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Laura Marie Everhart,
Assistant United States Attorney, Norfolk, 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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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 the
appeal 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, Dept 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 judgments 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 May 15, 1996; Appellants notice of appeal was filed on March 23, 1998. Appellants
failure to file a timely notice of appeal* or to obtain either an
extension or a reopening of the appeal period leaves this court
without jurisdiction to consider the merits of Appellants appeal.
We therefore deny Appellants motion for a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument
because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in
For the purposes of this appeal we assume that the date
Appellant wrote on the notice of appeal is the earliest date it
would have been submitted to prison authorities. See Houston v.
Lack, 487 U.S. 266 (1988).
2
the materials before the court and argument would not aid the
decisional process.
DISMISSED
