United States v. Norris , 60 F. App'x 506 ( 2003 )


Menu:
  •                          UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,              
    Plaintiff-Appellee,
    v.                             No. 03-6348
    NATHANIEL NORRIS,
    Defendant-Appellant.
    
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the District of South Carolina, at Spartanburg.
    Henry M. Herlong, Jr., District Judge.
    (CR-96-248)
    Submitted: April 2, 2003
    Decided: April 11, 2003
    Before WIDENER and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges, and
    HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
    Remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    COUNSEL
    Nathaniel Norris, Appellant Pro Se. Harold Watson Gowdy, III,
    OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Greenville,
    South Carolina, for Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See
    Local Rule 36(c).
    2                      UNITED STATES v. NORRIS
    OPINION
    PER CURIAM:
    Nathaniel Norris seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying
    his motion for reduction of sentence under 
    18 U.S.C. § 3582
     (2000).
    In criminal cases, the defendant must file his notice of appeal within
    ten days of the entry of judgment. Fed. R. App. P. 4(b)(1)(A); United
    States v. Alvarez, 
    210 F.3d 309
    , 310 (5th Cir. 2000) (holding that ten-
    day appeal period applies to § 3582 proceedings). With or without a
    motion, the district court may grant an extension of time to file of up
    to thirty days upon a showing of excusable neglect or good cause.
    Fed. R. App. P. 4(b)(4); United States v. Reyes, 
    759 F.2d 351
    , 353
    (4th Cir. 1985).
    The district court entered its order on January 31, 2003. Thus, the
    ten-day appeal period expired on February 14. See Fed. R. App. P. 26
    (providing that "intermediate Saturdays, Sundays, and legal holidays"
    are excluded when the time period is less than eleven days). Norris
    filed his notice of appeal on February 21—after the expiration of the
    appeal period but within the thirty-day excusable neglect period.
    Because Norris’ notice of appeal was filed within the excusable
    neglect period, we remand the case to the district court for the court
    to determine whether Norris has shown excusable neglect or good
    cause warranting an extension of the ten-day appeal period. The
    record, as supplemented, will then be returned to this court for further
    consideration.
    REMANDED
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 03-6348

Citation Numbers: 60 F. App'x 506

Judges: Hamilton, Luttig, Per Curiam, Widener

Filed Date: 4/11/2003

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 8/6/2023