MARION BEASLEY, JR., a/k/a Marion Beasley El, Jr. v. State of North Carolina

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 17-7637
MARION BEASLEY, JR., a/k/a Marion Beasley El, Jr.,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA,
Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at
Greensboro. N. Carlton Tilley, Jr., Senior District Judge. (1:14-cv-00448-NCT-LPA)
Submitted: February 15, 2018 Decided: February 20, 2018
Before WILKINSON, FLOYD, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Marion Beasley, Jr., Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 1 of 2 --

2
PER CURIAM:
Marion Beasley, Jr., seeks to appeal the district court’s order adopting the
magistrate judge’s recommendation and dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2012) petition.
We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the notice of appeal was not timely
filed.
Parties are accorded 30 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 29, 2017. The
notice of appeal was filed on December 13, 2017.* Because Beasley 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 this court and argument
would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED
* For the purpose of this appeal, we assume that the date appearing on the notice of
appeal is the earliest date it could have been properly delivered to prison officials for
mailing to the court. Fed. R. App. P. 4(c); Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266 (1988).

-- 2 of 2 --