Herbert Frazier v. Michael McCall

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion certificate of appealability (Local Rule 22(a)) [999458894-2] Originating case number: 2:13-cv-02279-JMC. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999557750]. Mailed to: Herbert Frazier. [14-7373]

Appeal: 14-7373

Doc: 6

Filed: 04/02/2015

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-7373

HERBERT T. FRAZIER,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
MICHAEL MCCALL, Warden,
Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Charleston.
J. Michelle Childs, District
Judge. (2:13-cv-02279-JMC)

Submitted:

February 24, 2015

Decided:

April 2, 2015

Before WILKINSON, AGEE, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Herbert T. Frazier, Appellant Pro Se.
Donald John Zelenka,
Senior Assistant Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for
Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 14-7373

Doc: 6

Filed: 04/02/2015

Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Herbert T. Frazier seeks to appeal the district court’s
order adopting the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation
and dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2012) petition.
the

appeal

for

lack

of

jurisdiction

because

We dismiss

Frazier

did

not

timely file a notice of appeal.
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).

“[T]he timely

filing of a notice of appeal in a civil case is a jurisdictional
requirement.”

Bowles v. Russell, 551 U.S. 205, 214 (2007).

The district court’s order was entered on the docket on
August 26, 2014.

Frazier did not file a notice of appeal.

Nor

is there any indication that Frazier’s motion for a certificate
of

appealability,

which

he

filed

prior

to

issuance

of

the

district court’s order and judgment, was intended to serve as a
notice

of

appeal.

Because

Frazier

failed

to

file

a

timely

notice of appeal or to obtain an extension or reopening of the
appeal

period,

we

deny

his

motion

appealability and dismiss the appeal.

for

a

certificate

of

We dispense with oral

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately

2

Appeal: 14-7373

Doc: 6

Filed: 04/02/2015

Pg: 3 of 3

presented in the materials before this court and argument would
not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED

3