Federal Narrative Summaries · July 2, 2026

Case Explained: ANDREW JOSEPH DICKS v. RONALD S. WEBER, Warden

Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Filed: 2026-07-02 The Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's dismissal of Andrew Joseph Dicks's appeal for lack of jurisdiction due to untimeliness. The court held that the notice of appeal was filed...

◆ Today's Recap

1:26 listen

Case Explained: ANDREW JOSEPH DICKS v. RONALD S. WEBER, Warden 0:00 / 1:26

1 decision covered

Coverage

Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

Filed: 2026-07-02

The Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court’s dismissal of Andrew Joseph Dicks’s appeal for lack of jurisdiction due to untimeliness. The court held that the notice of appeal was filed after the statutory deadline, finding that Dicks delivered his notice to prison officials on November 5, 2024, which exceeded the 30-day period required by Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 4(a)(1)(A) following the district court’s September 12, 2024 order dismissing his habeas petition. Applying the jurisdictional standard established in *Bowles v. Russell*, the court determined that the timely filing of a notice of appeal is a mandatory requirement that cannot be waived or extended by equitable considerations. Consequently, the court dismissed the appeal and denied Dicks’s motion for reconsideration regarding the mailing date, leaving the district court’s judgment dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition as successive and unauthorized in effect.

Do It For The Case Law is a news reporting service. Nothing in this episode constitutes legal advice.

Subscribe

Get every Federal Narrative Summaries episode the moment it drops.

Subscribe →