John Bernard Robinson v. ANTHONY PADULA, Warden of Lee Correctional Institution

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 10-7568
JOHN BERNARD ROBINSON,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
ANTHONY PADULA, Warden of Lee Correctional Institution,
Respondent - Appellee,
and
STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA,
Defendant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Aiken. J. Michelle Childs, District Judge.
(1:09-cv-01977-JMC)
Submitted: April 28, 2011 Decided: May 2, 2011
Before DAVIS, KEENAN, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
John Bernard Robinson, Appellant Pro Se. Donald John Zelenka,
Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 1 of 2 --

2
PER CURIAM:
John Bernard Robinson seeks to appeal the district
court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate
judge and denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2006)
petition. 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). “[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 judgment was entered on September
15, 2010, and the notice of appeal was deposited in the prison’s
internal mail system on October 20, 2010. See Fed. R. App. P.
4(c); Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266, 276 (1988). Because
Robinson failed to file a timely notice of appeal or to obtain
an extension or reopening of the appeal period, 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 --