Whether the Fifth Circuit erred in dismissing the petitioner's appeal for lack of jurisdiction

No question identified. : Texas prisoner Lawrence Napper asks this court to issue a writ of certiotari to review the judgment of the United States of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit : OPINIONS BELOW The Fifth Circuit's dismissed the appeal for Lack of : jurisdiction and further denied all depending motions referring .to this petitioner motion for certificsate of appelability and request and request ‘to file same in excess pages, filed on August 14, 2026). And the appeal was all considered closed. On February 20, 2029 the petitioner filed a document — titled (OBJECTION TO FINAL JUDGMENT). The district court construe the document as a motion for consideration thder Federal rule of Civil procedure 59(e) and denied relief on February 27, 2020. Therefore , the final day for filing a timely notice of appeal was Monday, March 30, 2020, because the thirthieth day was a Saturday. See. FED. APP. P. 26(a)(1)(C) The lack of a timely notice mandates dismissal of the appeal. United State v. GariciaiMachado, 845 F.2d 492, 493 (5th Cir. 1988 Accordingly, the appeal is DISMISSED for want of Jurisdiction. all pending motions are denied. The Fifth Circuit of Appeals rendered its decision September : 14, 2020. This petition was timely filed. The Supreme Court has certiorari jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. 1254(10). The Court of Appeals possessed jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. 2254. CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISION INVOLVED Amendment VI In all prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been commited, which dis-~trict shall have been previously ascertained by, the law, and to be informed of the nature and the cause ofthabacusation; to be — confronted with the witnesses against him, to have compulsory pro cess for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assis= tance of Counsel for the defense. Amendent XIV All persons born or naturalized in the United STATES, AND SUBJECT TO THE JURISDICTION THEREFOR ARE CITTIZENS OF THE United ~ States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the priviéges eg immunities of citizens of the United State, nor shall any State (2). y deprieve any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. STATUTORY PROVISIONS INVOLVED The Anti-Terrorism and effective death Penalty Act, 28 U.S.C. 2254, States; (d). An application for a writ of heabeas corpus on behalf of a person in the custody pursuant to the judgement of a State court shall not be granted with respect to any claim that was adjuducated on the merits in State scourt proceeding unless the adju-dication of the claim-(1). resulted in a decision that was contrary. to, or involved an uureasonable application of, clearly established Fed= 7 éral law, as determinted by the Supreme Court of the United States; or (2). resulted in a decision that was based on an unreasonable determination of the facts in light of the evidence presented in th State court proceeding. , (e)(1) In a proceeding instituted by an application for a writ of habeas corpus by a person in the custody pursuuant to the *. judgment of a State court, a determination of a factual issue ~:'' made by a State court shall be presaméd to be correct. The app-'> licant shall have the burden of rebutting the presumption of correctioness by clear and convincing evidence. 28 U.S.C. 2254(d) & (e) (2010). (3). No. ~ ° IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATE LAWRENCE JAMES NAPPER PETITIONER lye LAWRENCE J. NPPER TDCJ No.1080356 CIVIL ACTION No. H-20-261 November 8, 2020 vs. BOBBY LUMPKINS , DERECTOR , : RES PONDENT-APPELLEE TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTIONS DIVISION, On petition for writ of certiorai of the UnitedStates , Court of Appeal for the Fifth Circuit PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIOART " APPELLANT'S MOTION REQUESTING PERMISSION TO FILE TOGATHER WITH HIS CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABITY. TO THE HONORABLE SUPREME COURT