Terry Lynn Haines, Plaintiff-appellant, v. Manassas Adult Detention Center, Defendant-appellee, 896 F.2d 546 (4th Cir. 1990)

Annotate this Case
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit - 896 F.2d 546 (4th Cir. 1990) Submitted: Oct. 20, 1989. Decided: Feb. 7, 1990

Terry Lynn Haines, appellant pro se.

Dennis Patrick Lacy, Jr., Kathleen Shepherd Mehfoud, Lacy & Mehfoud, PC, for Appellee.

Before K.K. HALL and WILKINSON, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge.

PER CURIAM:


Terry Lynn Haines, 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).*  It was therefore untimely. See Houston v. Lack, 56 U.S.L.W. 4728 (U.S. June 24, 1988) (No. 87-5428). Although he requested an extension of the appeal period within the additional 30-day period provided by Fed. R. App. P. 4(a) (5), the magistrate found that he had failed to show excusable neglect or good cause why his notice of appeal was late. The magistrate's dismissal of Haines' requests for an extension of time does not constitute an abuse of discretion and therefore this Court will not disturb this decision. See Reinsurance Co. of America v. Administratia, 808 F.2d 1249, 1251 (7th Cir. 1987).

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 to show excusable neglect or good cause for 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 dispositive issues recently have been decided authoritatively.

DISMISSED.

 *

For the purposes of this appeal, we assume that the date Haines placed on the notice of appeal is the earliest date he would have submitted it to prison authorities

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.