United States v. Kennedy , 120 F. App'x 503 ( 2005 )


Menu:
  •                             UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 04-7213
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    versus
    JOHN DAMON KENNEDY,
    Defendant - Appellant.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    Maryland, at Greenbelt. Alexander Williams, Jr., District Judge.
    (CR-02-470-AW)
    Submitted:   January 21, 2005             Decided:   February 9, 2005
    Before LUTTIG, WILLIAMS, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    John Damon Kennedy, Appellant Pro Se. Gina Laurie Simms, OFFICE OF
    THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Greenbelt, Maryland, for Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    See Local Rule 36(c).
    PER CURIAM:
    John Damon Kennedy seeks to appeal the district court’s
    order denying a motion to reconsider the restitution portion of
    Kennedy’s criminal sentence. 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).       With or without a motion, the district
    court may grant an extension of time 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 May 18, 2004; the
    ten-day    appeal     period,   which   excludes     weekends   and   holidays,
    expired on June 2.       Kennedy filed his notice of appeal after both
    the ten-day period and the thirty-day excusable neglect period
    expired.     The notice of appeal is therefore untimely, and the
    appeal    must   be   dismissed   for    lack   of   jurisdiction.       United
    States v. Robinson, 
    361 U.S. 220
    , 227 (1960) (holding appeal period
    “mandatory and jurisdictional”).          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.
    DISMISSED
    - 2 -
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 04-7213

Citation Numbers: 120 F. App'x 503

Judges: Duncan, Luttig, Per Curiam, Williams

Filed Date: 2/9/2005

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 8/7/2023