United States v. Saunders

26 F. App'x 333

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Barry Lee Saunders seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his motion for leave to file an untimely motion pursuant to 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2001) and denying his motion for a downward departure pursuant to U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 3E1.1. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because Saunders’s notice of appeal was not timely filed.

Parties are accorded sixty days after entry of the district court’s final judgment or order to note an appeal, see Fed. R.App. P. 4(a)(1), 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). This appeal period is “mandatory and jurisdictional.” Browder v. Director, Dep’t of Corrections, 434 U.S. 257, 264, 98 S.Ct. 556, 54 L.Ed.2d 521 (1978) (quoting United States v. Robinson, 361 U.S. 220, 229, 80 S.Ct. 282, 4 L.Ed.2d 259 (I960)).

The district court’s order was entered on the docket on May 11, 2001. Saunders’s notice of appeal was filed on August 20, 2001. Because Saunders 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.