Michael Antwuan Williams v. Loretta K. Kelly
Filing
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [999317832-2] Originating case number: 3:10-cv-00808-JRS Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999345942]. Mailed to: Williams. [14-6203]
Appeal: 14-6203
Doc: 10
Filed: 04/29/2014
Pg: 1 of 3
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 14-6203
MICHAEL ANTWUAN WILLIAMS,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
LORETTA K. KELLY, Warden, Sussex I State Prison,
Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Richmond.
James R. Spencer, District
Judge. (3:10-cv-00808-JRS)
Submitted:
April 24, 2014
Decided:
April 29, 2014
Before NIEMEYER, SHEDD, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Michael Antwuan Williams, Appellant Pro Se.
Alice Theresa
Armstrong, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond,
Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Appeal: 14-6203
Doc: 10
Filed: 04/29/2014
Pg: 2 of 3
PER CURIAM:
Michael Antwuan Williams seeks to appeal the district
court’s
order
petition.
denying
We
dismiss
relief
the
on
his
appeal
28
for
U.S.C.
lack
§ 2254
of
(2012)
jurisdiction
because the notice of appeal was not timely filed.
Parties are accorded thirty days after 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).
“Lack of notice of
the entry does not affect the time for appeal or relieve—or
authorize the court to relieve—a party for failing to appeal
within the time allowed, except as allowed by Federal Rule of
Appellate Procedure (4)(a).”
Rule
4(a)(6)
of
Fed. R. Civ. P. 77(d)(2).
the
Federal
Rules
of
Appellate
Procedure permits the reopening of the appeal period if a party
has
not
received
twenty-one
days
notice
after
of
entry,
the
but
judgment
the
motion
or
order
within
requesting
such
relief must be filed within 180 days after entry of the judgment
or order or fourteen days after the party received notice of the
judgment
4(a)(6).
or
order,
whichever
is
earlier.
Fed.
R.
App.
P.
The time requirements of Rule 4(a) are mandatory and
jurisdictional.
Bowles v. Russell, 551 U.S. 205, 208-14 (2007);
Browder v. Dir., Dep’t of Corr., 434 U.S. 257, 264-65 (1978).
2
Appeal: 14-6203
Doc: 10
Filed: 04/29/2014
Pg: 3 of 3
The district court’s order was entered on the docket
on August 30, 2011.
motion
to
mailing
reopen
on
Williams delivered a notice of appeal and
the
January
appeal
27,
period
2014.
See
to
prison
Fed.
R.
Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266, 276 (1988).
officials
App.
P.
for
4(c);
In the notice and
motion, Williams claimed he was not “properly notified” of the
district court’s denial decision in time to file a timely notice
of appeal.
However, the 180-day reopening period expired well
before Williams filed his notice of appeal and motion to reopen.
Thus,
Williams
period.
is
not
eligible
for
reopening
of
the
appeal
Nunley v. City of Los Angeles, 52 F.3d 792, 794-95
(9th Cir. 1995); Hensley v. Chesapeake & Ohio Ry. Co., 651 F.2d
226, 228 (4th Cir. 1981).
Accordingly, because Williams failed to file a timely
notice of appeal or to obtain an extension of the appeal period
and is not eligible for reopening of the appeal period, we deny
leave
to
proceed
We dispense
with
contentions
are
in
oral
forma
pauperis
argument
adequately
and
because
presented
in
dismiss
the
the
facts
the
materials
appeal.
and
legal
before
this 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?