Lorenzo Payton v. S. Holcomb

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

Lorenzo Payton v. S. Holcomb

Opinion

USCA4 Appeal: 24-6791      Doc: 11         Filed: 01/06/2025    Pg: 1 of 3




                                            UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT


                                              No. 24-6791


        LORENZO PAYTON,

                            Plaintiff -Appellant,

                     v.

        S. HOLCOMB, Albemarle Correctional Institution, Correctional Sergeant II;
        CORRECTIONAL OFFICER BAKER, Albemarle Correctional Institution;
        CORRECTIONAL OFFICER LOWDER, Albemarle Correctional Institution,

                            Defendants - Appellees.



        Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at
        Greensboro. William L. Osteen, Jr., District Judge. (1:20-cv-00801-WO-LPA)


        Submitted: October 23, 2024                                       Decided: January 6, 2025


        Before GREGORY, RUSHING, and BERNER, Circuit Judges.


        Remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion.


        Lorenzo Payton, Appellant Pro Se.


        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 24-6791       Doc: 11         Filed: 01/06/2025      Pg: 2 of 3




        PER CURIAM:

               Lorenzo Payton seeks to appeal the district court’s order accepting the

        recommendation of the magistrate judge and granting summary judgment to Defendants

        on Payton’s 
42 U.S.C. § 1983
 claims. Parties to a civil action are accorded 30 days after

        the entry of the district court’s final judgment or order to note an appeal. Fed. R. App. P.

        4(a)(1)(A). However, the district court may extend the time to file a notice of appeal if a

        party moves for an extension of the appeal period within 30 days after the expiration of the

        original appeal period and demonstrates excusable neglect or good cause to warrant an

        extension. Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5); see Washington v. Bumgarner, 
882 F.2d 899, 900-01

        (4th Cir. 1989). “[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’s final judgment was entered on June 28, 2024, and the appeal

        period expired on July 29, 2024. Payton filed his notice of appeal on August 9, 2024, * after

        the expiration of the 30-day appeal period but within the excusable neglect period. Because

        Payton’s notice of appeal requested that the district court grant him a belated appeal, we

        construe the notice as a timely request for an extension of time to file an appeal.

        Accordingly, we remand the case for the limited purpose of allowing the district court to

        determine whether the time for filing a notice of appeal should be extended under Fed. R.



               *
                 For the purpose of this appeal, we assume that the postmark date appearing on the
        envelope containing the notice of appeal is the earliest date Payton could have delivered
        the notice to prison officials for mailing to the court. Fed. R. App. P. 4(c)(1); Houston v.
        Lack, 
487 U.S. 266, 276
 (1988).

                                                      2
USCA4 Appeal: 24-6791      Doc: 11         Filed: 01/06/2025      Pg: 3 of 3




        App. P. 4(a)(5). The record, as supplemented, will then be returned to this court for further

        consideration.

                                                                                       REMANDED




                                                     3


Reference

Status
Unpublished