Texte intégral
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 16-6831
OTIS T. MADISON,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
DIRECTOR OF THE VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS,
Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Richmond. Henry E. Hudson, District
Judge. (3:15-cv-00422-HEH-RCY)
Submitted: October 18, 2016 Decided: October 21, 2016
Before WILKINSON, KING, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.
Remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Otis T. Madison, Appellant Pro Se. Aaron Jennings Campbell,
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia,
for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Otis T. Madison seeks to appeal the district court’s order
accepting the magistrate judge’s recommendation and denying
relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2012) petition. Parties are
accorded 30 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).
Because Madison is incarcerated, the notice of appeal is
considered filed on the date it was “deposited in the
institution’s internal mailing system.” Fed. R. App. P.
4(c)(1); accord Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266, 276 (1988). The
record does not conclusively reveal when Madison delivered the
notice of appeal to prison officials for mailing. Accordingly,
we remand the case for the limited purpose of allowing the
district court to determine this fact and, having done so, to
determine whether the filing was timely under Fed. R. App. P.
4(c)(1). The record, as supplemented, will then be returned to
this court for further consideration.
REMANDED
-- 2 of 2 --