August Bernard Doak v. W.L. Garrison, Warden, United States Penitentiary, Leavenworth, Kansas Attorney General of the State of Maryland
Summary of the case August Bernard Doak v. W.L. Garrison, Warden, United States Penitentiary, Leavenworth, Kansas Attorney General of the State of Maryland
The Fourth Circuit Court dismissed the appeal of August Bernard Doak due to his failure to file within the mandatory thirty-day period and not obtaining an extension. The court found the time limits to be mandatory and jurisdictional, thus lacking jurisdiction to consider the case.
Key Issues of the case August Bernard Doak v. W.L. Garrison, Warden, United States Penitentiary, Leavenworth, Kansas Attorney General of the State of Maryland
- Timeliness of appeal filing
- Jurisdictional requirements for appeal
Key Facts of the case August Bernard Doak v. W.L. Garrison, Warden, United States Penitentiary, Leavenworth, Kansas Attorney General of the State of Maryland
- Appellant filed the appeal outside the thirty-day period.
- Appellant did not obtain an extension within the additional thirty-day period.
Decision of the case August Bernard Doak v. W.L. Garrison, Warden, United States Penitentiary, Leavenworth, Kansas Attorney General of the State of Maryland
Dismissed
Opinions
19 F.3d 1428
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
August Bernard DOAK, Petitioner Appellant,
v.
W.L. GARRISON, Warden, United States Penitentiary,
Leavenworth, Kansas; Attorney General of the
State of Maryland, Respondents Appellees.
No. 93-7184.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted March 17, 1994.
Decided March 31, 1994.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Joseph C. Howard, District Judge. (CA-81-2500-JH)
August Bernard Doak, appellant pro se.
D.Md.
DISMISSED.
Before PHILLIPS and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge.
PER CURIAM:
Appellant noted this appeal outside the thirty-day appeal period established by Fed. R.App. P. 4(a)(1), failed to obtain an extension of the appeal period within the additional thirty-day period provided by Fed. R.App. P. 4(a)(5), and is not entitled to relief under Fed. R.App. P. 4(a)(6). The time periods established by Fed. R.App. P. 4 are "mandatory and jurisdictional." Browder v. Director, Dep't of Corrections, 434 U.S. 257, 264 (1978) (quoting United States v. Robinson, 361 U.S. 220, 229 (1960)). Appellant's failure to note a timely appeal or obtain an extension of the appeal period deprives this Court of jurisdiction to consider this case. We therefore deny a certificate of probable cause to appeal, deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis, and 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
We also deny Appellant's motion for appointment of counsel