Ronnie Sylvia v. Tommy Maddox

Filing 920091021

Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-6786 RONNIE SYLVIA, Plaintiff Appellant, v. TOMMY MADDOX; TONI BANKS; D. WEAVER; N. AUSTIN, Defendants Appellees, and KEITH WHITENER, Defendant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Statesville. Graham C. Mullen, Senior District Judge. (5:05-cv-00013-GCM) Submitted: October 15, 2009 Decided: October 21, 2009 Before SHEDD, DUNCAN, and AGEE, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Jeffrey Michael Brandt, ROBINSON & BRANDT, PSC, Covington, Kentucky, for Appellant. James Philip Allen, Assistant Attorney General, Joseph Edward Elder, NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Ronnie orders dismissing Sylvia his seeks 42 to appeal 1983 the district court's and U.S.C. (2006) complaint denying his motion for reconsideration. 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). is "mandatory and jurisdictional." Corr., 434 U.S. 257, 264 (1978) This appeal period Browder v. Dir., Dep't of (quoting United States v. Robinson, 361 U.S. 220, 229 (1960)). The district court's orders were entered on the docket on August 7, 2007, and August 28, 2007. was filed no sooner than April 9, 2009. The notice of appeal Because Sylvia failed to file a timely notice of appeal or to obtain an extension or reopening of the appeal period, we deny his motion for appointment of counsel and dismiss the appeal. oral argument because the facts and legal We dispense with contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and oral argument would not aid the decisional process. DISMISSED 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?