Poole v. Leath Correctional
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
KIMBERLY RENEE POOLE, Petitioner - Appellant, versus LEATH CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION, Warden; HENRY MCMASTER, Attorney General for the State of South Carolina, Respondents - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Rock Hill. R. Bryan Harwell, District Judge. (0:03-cv-03499-RBH)
Submitted: July 24, 2007
July 31, 2007
Before WILKINSON, TRAXLER, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
William Isaac Diggs, Chief Attorney, DIGGS, DIGGS & AXELROD, Myrtle Beach, South Carolina, for Appellant. Donald John Zelenka, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF SOUTH CAROLINA, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM: Kimberly Renee Poole seeks to appeal the district court's order dismissing her 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) petition. We dismiss
the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the notice of appeal was not timely filed. Parties are accorded thirty 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). and jurisdictional." This appeal period is "mandatory
Browder v. Dir., Dep't of Corr., 434 U.S.
257, 264 (1978) (quoting United States v. Robinson, 361 U.S. 220, 229 (1960)). The district court's order was entered on the docket on January 31, 2007. March 27, 2007. Poole's counsel filed the notice of appeal on Because Poole failed to file a timely notice of
appeal or to obtain an extension or reopening of the appeal period, we dismiss the appeal. facts and legal before We dispense with oral argument because the are and adequately argument presented not in aid the the
contentions the court
- 2 -
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?