United States of America v. Raynor, 939 F.2d 191, 197 4th Cir. 1991 . The only exception to the appeal period is…

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 00-7243
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
O’NEAL MCGILL, a/k/a James Owens, a/k/a Hard
Times,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Graham C. Mullen, Chief
District Judge. (CR-97-166-12-3-MU)
Submitted: November 30, 2000 Decided: January 31, 2001
Before NIEMEYER, LUTTIG, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
O’Neal McGill, Appellant Pro Se. Gretchen C.F. Shappert, Assistant
United States Attorney, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).

-- 1 of 2 --

2
PER CURIAM:
O’Neal McGill appeals from the district court’s order denying
his motion to correct his name on his criminal judgment. We dis-
miss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because McGill’s notice of
appeal was not timely filed.
Defendants in criminal cases have ten days within which to
file in the district court notices of appeal from judgments or
final orders. Fed. R. App. P. 4(b)(1). This time period is “man-
datory and jurisdictional.” United States v. Raynor, 939 F.2d 191,
197 (4th Cir. 1991). The only exception to the appeal period is
when the district court grants an extension “[u]pon a finding of
excusable neglect or good cause.” Fed. R. App. P. 4(b)(4).
The district court’s order was entered on August 11, 2000.
McGill filed his notice of appeal on August 24, 2000. See Houston
v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266, 276 (1988). McGill’s failure to note a
timely appeal or obtain an extension of the appeal period leaves
this court without jurisdiction to consider the merits of his ap-
peal. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral
argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately
presented in the materials before the court and argument would not
aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED

-- 2 of 2 --