Terence Bryan v. South Carolina Department of C

Filing 920080501


Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-6205 TERENCE TERELL BRYAN, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. SOUTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS; FNU BIRD, Lieutenant; CAPTAIN PRICE; OFFICER OUTLAW; TRANSPORTATION SERGEANT; GREY HOUSE, Officer; OFFICER PHILLIPS; FIRST NAME UNKNOWN, Lieutenant, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Florence. Terry L. Wooten, District Judge. (4:06-cv-03358-TLW) Submitted: April 18, 2008 Decided: May 1, 2008 Before WILKINSON, TRAXLER, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Terence Terell Bryan, Appellant Pro Se. Charles Franklin Turner, Jr., TURNER, PADGET, GRAHAM & LANEY, PA, Greenville, South Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Terence Terell Bryan seeks to appeal the district court's order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. 1983 (2000) complaint. Appellees have moved to dismiss the appeal as untimely filed. We grant the motion and 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 September 13, 2007. 2008. The notice of appeal was filed on January 28, Because Bryan failed to file a timely notice of appeal or to obtain an extension or reopening of the appeal period, we grant the motion to dismiss the appeal. counsel is denied. facts and legal The motion for appointment of We dispense with oral argument because the contentions are adequately presented in the - 2 - materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. DISMISSED - 3 -

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?