United States v. Lynn ( 1997 )


Menu:
  •                             UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 97-7241
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    versus
    BRENDA LAY LYNN,
    Defendant - Appellant.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern Dis-
    trict of West Virginia, at Martinsburg. Irene M. Keeley, District
    Judge. (CR-94-130, CA-97-29-3)
    Submitted:   November 6, 1997          Decided:     December 23, 1997
    Before WIDENER and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior
    Circuit Judge.
    Affirmed in part and dismissed in part by unpublished per curiam
    opinion.
    Brenda Lay Lynn, Appellant Pro Se. Paul Thomas Camilletti, OFFICE
    OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Wheeling, West Virginia, for
    Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    See Local Rule 36(c).
    PER CURIAM:
    Appellant appeals the district court's order denying three
    post-conviction motions. Insofar as appellant appeals the district
    court's decision denying her motion filed under Fed. R. Civ. P.
    60(b), we have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion
    and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm that order on
    the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Lynn, No. CA-
    97-29-3 (N.D.W. Va. July 21, 1997).
    Insofar as appellant seeks to appeal from the motions filed
    under 
    18 U.S.C. § 3553
    (b) (1994) seeking a reduction in sentence
    and an evidentiary hearing in that matter, the notice of appeal was
    untimely. We therefore dismiss the appeal as to those motions 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 judg-
    ments or final orders. See 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 denying the criminal
    motions on July 21, 1997; Appellant's notice of appeal was filed in
    the district court on September 2, 1997. Though the record contains
    no certification of when she relayed her notice of appeal to prison
    authorities for mailing to the district court, it appears that Ap-
    2
    pellant mailed the document on August 26, 1997, beyond the ten-day
    appeal period. 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 materials before the court and argument would not
    aid the decisional process.
    AFFIRMED IN PART; DISMISSED IN PART
    *
    Appellant's § 3553(b) motion was untimely. Accordingly, we
    conclude that remanding to the district court for assessment of
    whether Appellant can demonstrate excusable neglect for her late
    notice of appeal is not warranted.
    3
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 97-7241

Filed Date: 12/23/1997

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 10/30/2014