Ray Blanchard v. Brian Frosh

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

Ray Blanchard v. Brian Frosh

Opinion

USCA4 Appeal: 24-6372      Doc: 14         Filed: 06/28/2024    Pg: 1 of 3




                                            UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT


                                              No. 24-6372


        RAY BLANCHARD,

                            Petitioner - Appellant,

                     v.

        BRIAN E. FROSH, Attorney General for the State of Maryland; WARDEN
        GREGORY A. WERNER

                            Respondents - Appellees.



        Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore.
        Lydia Kay Griggsby, District Judge. (1:21-cv-01494-LKG)


        Submitted: June 25, 2024                                          Decided: June 28, 2024


        Before RICHARDSON and QUATTLEBAUM, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior
        Circuit Judge.


        Remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion.


        Ray A. Blanchard, Appellant Pro Se.


        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 24-6372       Doc: 14          Filed: 06/28/2024      Pg: 2 of 3




        PER CURIAM:

               Ray A. Blanchard, a Maryland prisoner, seeks to appeal the district court’s order

        denying relief on his 
28 U.S.C. § 2254
 petition. “[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).

        Parties have 30 days after the entry of the district court’s final judgment or order to note an

        appeal in a civil case, Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(A), 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). A district court may reopen the appeal period under Rule 4(a)(6) if (1) the party

        moving for reopening did not receive notice of the entry of the judgment or order sought

        to be appealed within 21 days after entry; (2) the motion to reopen is filed within 180 days

        after the entry of the judgment or order, or within 14 days after receiving notice of such

        entry, whichever is earlier; and (3) a reopening would not prejudice any party.

               The district court entered its order on December 14, 2023, and the appeal period

        expired on January 16, 2024. See Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(A); Fed. R. App. P. 26(a)(1)(C).

        Blanchard filed his notice of appeal, at the earliest, on March 31, 2024. 1 Blanchard’s

        appeal was thus filed after the appeal period expired. The district court’s docket reflects,

        however, that the copy of the district court’s order mailed to Blanchard was returned as

        undeliverable. The record thus does not show that Blanchard ever received notice of the

        order through a method of service specified in Fed. R. Civ. P. 5(b). See Fed. R. Civ. P.


               1
                 Blanchard mailed a request for a certificate of appealability to this court on
        March 31, 2024. This court construed it as a notice of appeal and forwarded it to the district
        court. See Fed. R. App. P. 4(c)(1), (d); Houston v. Lack, 
487 U.S. 266, 276
 (1988).

                                                       2
USCA4 Appeal: 24-6372      Doc: 14         Filed: 06/28/2024     Pg: 3 of 3




        77(d)(1); Shuler v. Orangeburg Cnty. Sheriff’s Dep’t, 
71 F.4th 236, 246
 (4th Cir. 2023).

        The district court is in the position to make findings on when and how Blanchard received

        notice of its order and whether Blanchard satisfies the requirements of Rule 4(a)(6).

               Accordingly, we construe Blanchard’s notice of appeal as a motion to reopen the

        appeal period and remand to the district court for the limited purpose of determining

        whether Blanchard is entitled to a reopening of the appeal period. 2 The record, as

        supplemented, will then be returned to this court for further consideration.

                                                                                       REMANDED




               2
                 If the district court reopens the appeal period, Blanchard will have to file a new
        notice of appeal. See Parrish v. United States, 
74 F.4th 160
, 166-67 (4th Cir. 2023).

                                                     3


Reference

Status
Unpublished