Keith Henderson v. James Graham, No. 15-7260 (4th Cir. 2016)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-7260 KEITH HENDERSON, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. JAMES E. GRAHAM; STEPHEN J. MURPHY, III; A. BISHOP; KRISTINA COOK GRAHAM; MARVIN S. ARRINGTON; W. LOUIS SANDS; HILTON HALL; JOSE MORALES; ROBERT TOOLE; CLAY TANTRUN; RICKY JACCOBS; SHEILA OUBRE, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Dever III, Chief District Judge. (5:15-ct-03003-D) Submitted: December 28, 2015 Decided: July 15, 2016 Before THACKER and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Keith Henderson, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Keith Henderson seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing this civil action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) (2012). We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the notice of appeal was not timely filed. When the United States or its officer or agency is a party, the notice of appeal must be filed no more than 60 days after the entry of the district court’s final judgment or order, Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(B), 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 May 5, 2015. The notice of appeal was filed on July 10, 2015. * Because Henderson failed to file a timely notice of appeal or to obtain an extension or reopening of the appeal period, we deny Henderson’s motion for appointment of counsel, and dismiss the appeal. The motions for speedy trial and for appointment of counsel are denied. We dispense with oral argument because the * The notice of appeal was hand-dated July 10, 2015, but not filed until July 27. Under Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266 (1988), the notice of appeal is deemed filed on July 10, 2015 — the date it was presumably delivered to prison officials for mailing. 2 facts and materials legal before contentions are adequately this and argument court presented would not in the aid the decisional process. DISMISSED 3
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.
