Robbie Collins v. Anthony Padula, No. 13-7589 (4th Cir. 2014)
Annotate this CaseThis opinion or order relates to an opinion or order originally issued on February 19, 2014.
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-7589 ROBBIE COLLINS, Petitioner - Appellant, v. ANTHONY PADULA, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Charleston. Cameron McGowan Currie, Senior District Judge. (2:12-cv-00710-CMC) Submitted: May 29, 2014 Before KING and Circuit Judge. DIAZ, Decided: Circuit Judges, and June 4, 2014 HAMILTON, Senior Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Robbie Collins, Appellant Pro Se. Donald John Zelenka, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Alphonso Simon, Jr., Assistant Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Robbie Collins seeks to appeal the district court s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 (2012) petition. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the notice of appeal was not timely filed. Parties are accorded thirty days after the entry of the district court s final judgment or order to note an appeal, Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(A), 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). [T]he timely filing of a notice of appeal in a civil case is a jurisdictional requirement. Bowles v. Russell, 551 U.S. 205, 214 (2007). The district court s order was entered on the docket on August 23, 2013. 26, 2013. The notice of appeal was filed on September See Fed. R. App. P. 4(c)(1); Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266 (1988). Because Collins failed to file a timely notice of appeal or to obtain an extension or reopening of the appeal period, we 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 this court and argument would not aid the decisional process. DISMISSED 2
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.
