United States v. Michael Tucker

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

United States v. Michael Tucker

Opinion

USCA4 Appeal: 22-6554 Doc: 10 Filed: 10/21/2022 Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 22-6554

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

MICHAEL JAMAL TUCKER, a/k/a Jay,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. James P. Jones, Senior District Judge. (7:16-cr-00002-JPJ-1; 7:21-cv-81474- JPJ)

Submitted: October 18, 2022 Decided: October 21, 2022

Before WYNN and THACKER, Circuit Judges, and FLOYD, Senior Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Michael Jamal Tucker, Appellant Pro Se. Michael Andrew Baudinet, Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. USCA4 Appeal: 22-6554 Doc: 10 Filed: 10/21/2022 Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:

Michael Jamal Tucker seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his

28 U.S.C. § 2255

motion. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the notice

of appeal was not timely filed.

When the United States or its officer or agency is a party in a civil case, the notice

of appeal must be filed no more than 60 days after the entry of the district court’s final

judgment or order, Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(B), 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 entered its order on October 18, 2021. Tucker filed the notice of

appeal on May 6, 2022. Because Tucker failed to file a timely notice of appeal or to obtain

an extension or reopening of the appeal period, we deny his motion for appointment of

counsel and 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

2

Reference

Status
Unpublished