United States v. Felton

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

United States v. Felton

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-7587

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

GERALD FELTON, a/k/a Big Mass,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Fox, Chief District Judge. (CR-93-123-F)

Submitted: December 12, 1996 Decided: December 19, 1996

Before MURNAGHAN, NIEMEYER, and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Gerald Felton, Appellant Pro Se. Christine Blaise Hamilton, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM:

Gerald Felton filed an untimely notice of appeal from the

district court's denial of his motion for reduction of sentence. We

dismiss for lack of jurisdiction. The time periods for filing notices of appeal are governed by Fed. R. App. P. 4. These periods

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)). Criminal defendants have ten

days within which to file in the district court notices of appeal

from judgments or final orders. Fed. R. App. P. 4(b).* The only

exception to the appeal period is when the district court extends

the time to appeal under Fed. R. App. P. 4(b) upon a showing of

excusable neglect. The district court entered its order on March 20, 1996; Appel-

lant's notice of appeal was filed on October 11, 1996. Appellant's

failure to obtain an extension within the prescribed time frame leaves this court without jurisdiction to consider the merits of

Appellant's appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the

facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the mate-

rials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional

process.

DISMISSED

* Even if Appellant's motion for reduction of sentence were construed as a motion under

28 U.S.C. § 2255

(1994), amended by Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996,

Pub. L. No. 104-132, 110

Stat. 1214, which has a sixty-day appeal period, the notice of appeal was untimely.

2

Reference

Status
Unpublished