Mark John Woodlock v. Lloyd Waters, Warden Attorney General of the State of Maryland

59 F.3d 168, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 23215, 1995 WL 370434

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
• Decided: June 22, 1995
• Docket: 95-6143
• Status: Published

Opinion

59 F.3d 168
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.

Mark John WOODLOCK, Petitioner--Appellant,
v.
Lloyd WATERS, Warden; Attorney General of the State of
Maryland, Respondents--Appellees.

No. 95-6143.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: May 18, 1995.
Decided: June 22, 1995.

Mark John Woodlock, Appellant Pro Se. John Joseph Curran, Jr., Attorney General, Gary Eugene Bair, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, MD, for Appellees.

D.Md.

DISMISSED.

Before NIEMEYER and WILLIAMS, 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 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.