Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • In Re: Joseph Marion Head, JR., in Re: Joseph Marion Head, JR., 996 F.2d 1211, 4th Cir. (1993)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    4 views2 pages
    The document summarizes two appeals by Joseph Marion Head Jr. to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. In case number 93-6201, the Court affirms the district court's dismissal of 57 of Head's pleadings under 28 U.S.C. 1915(d). In case number 93-6202, the Court dismisses the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because Head failed to file his notice of appeal within the time period required by the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure. The Court denies Head's motions for appointment of counsel and for oral argument.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1993-06-23 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Citations: 996 F.2d 1211 Docket: 93-6201

    Original Title

    In Re: Joseph Marion Head, Jr., in Re: Joseph Marion Head, Jr., 996 F.2d 1211, 4th Cir. (1993)

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The document summarizes two appeals by Joseph Marion Head Jr. to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. In case number 93-6201, the Court affirms the district court's dismissal of 57 of Head's pleadings under 28 U.S.C. 1915(d). In case number 93-6202, the Court dismisses the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because Head failed to file his notice of appeal within the time period required by the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure. The Court denies Head's motions for appointment of counsel and for oral argument.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    4 views2 pages

    In Re: Joseph Marion Head, JR., in Re: Joseph Marion Head, JR., 996 F.2d 1211, 4th Cir. (1993)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The document summarizes two appeals by Joseph Marion Head Jr. to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. In case number 93-6201, the Court affirms the district court's dismissal of 57 of Head's pleadings under 28 U.S.C. 1915(d). In case number 93-6202, the Court dismisses the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because Head failed to file his notice of appeal within the time period required by the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure. The Court denies Head's motions for appointment of counsel and for oral argument.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 2

    996 F.

    2d 1211

    NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of


    unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing
    res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires
    service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth
    Circuit.
    In Re: Joseph Marion HEAD, Jr., Petitioner-Appellant.
    In Re: Joseph Marion HEAD, Jr., Petitioner-Appellant.
    Nos. 93-6201, 93-6202.

    United States Court of Appeals,


    Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: June 7, 1993.
    Decided: June 23, 1993.

    Appeals from the United States District Court for the Western District of
    North Carolina, at Shelby. Richard L. Voorhees, Chief District Judge.
    (CA-93-16-4)
    Joseph Marion Head, Jr., Appellant Pro Se.
    W.D.N.C.
    AFFIRMED IN NO. 93-6201 AND DISMISSED IN NO. 93-6202.
    Before HALL, WILKINSON, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.
    OPINION
    PER CURIAM:

    In No. 93-6201, Joseph Marion Head, Jr., appeals from the district court's order
    dismissing Head's fifty-seven pleadings pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1915(d)
    (1988). Our review of the record and the district court's opinion discloses that
    this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the
    district court. In re: Joseph Marion Head, Jr., No. CA-93-16-4 (W.D.N.C. Feb.
    1, 1993).

    In No. 93-6202, Head noted the appeal outside the thirty-day appeal period
    established by Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1), and failed to move for an extension of
    the appeal period within the additional thirty-day period provided by Fed. R.
    App. P. 4(a)(5). 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 obtain 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 facts and legal contentions are
    adequately presented in the materials before the Court and argument would not
    aid the decisional process. The motions for appointment of counsel and for oral
    argument are denied.

    No. 93-6201, AFFIRMED No. 93-6202, DISMISSED

    You might also like