Linwood E. Cosby, Plaintiff-appellant, v. P. Doyle; K. Gearhart; Larry W. Huffman, Defendants-appellees, 896 F.2d 545 (4th Cir. 1990)
Annotate this CaseLinwood E. Cosby, appellant pro se.
Robert Harkness Herring, Jr., Assistant Attorney General, for appellees.
Before PHILLIPS and CHAPMAN, Circuit Judges, and HARRISON L. WINTER, Senior Circuit Judge.
PER CURIAM:
Linwood E. Cosby, a state prisoner, submitted his notice of appeal to prison authorities outside the 30-day period established by Fed. R. App. P. 4(a) (1).1 It was therefore untimely. See Houston v. Lack, 56 U.S.L.W. 4728 (U.S. June 24, 1988) (No. 87-5428). In addition, he failed to move for an extension of the appeal period within the additional 30-day period provided by Fed. R. App. P. 4(a) (5).
The time periods established by Fed.R.App. 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.2 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.
For the purposes of this appeal, we assume that the date Cosby placed on the notice of appeal is the earliest date he would have submitted it to prison authorities
In correspondence addressed to this Court, Cosby has attempted to raise a new claim of retaliation. This claim must first be presented in the district court before it can be considered on appeal
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
