Raaj Rafa El v. Wayne Wright ( 2023 )


Menu:
  • USCA4 Appeal: 22-7409      Doc: 13         Filed: 04/25/2023    Pg: 1 of 2
    UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 22-7409
    RAAJ RAFA EL, a/k/a Roger Moore, a/k/a Raaj Rafael,
    Petitioner - Appellant,
    v.
    WAYNE WRIGHT, Warden,
    Respondent - Appellee.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore.
    Lydia Kay Griggsby, District Judge. (1:22-cv-01824-LKG)
    Submitted: April 20, 2023                                         Decided: April 25, 2023
    Before KING and QUATTLEBAUM, Circuit Judges, and FLOYD, Senior Circuit Judge.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Raaj Rafa El, Appellant Pro Se.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    USCA4 Appeal: 22-7409         Doc: 13       Filed: 04/25/2023      Pg: 2 of 2
    PER CURIAM:
    Raaj Rafa El, a former state pretrial detainee, seeks to appeal the district court’s
    order denying relief on his 
    28 U.S.C. § 2241
     petition. * Since the district court denied relief
    on Rafa El’s petition, however, he pleaded guilty to the state burglary charge and was
    sentenced. Because Rafa El is no longer in custody, we dismiss the appeal as moot. See
    Jackson v. Clements, 
    796 F.3d 841
    , 843 (7th Cir. 2015).
    We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are
    adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the
    decisional process.
    DISMISSED
    *
    Although Rafa El noted his appeal after the expiration of the 30-day appeal period
    in Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(A), we conclude that we have jurisdiction over his appeal
    because the district court’s order explaining its reasons for dismissal was not accompanied
    by a separate document setting forth the court’s judgment, as required by Fed. R. Civ. P.
    58(a). See Hughes v. Halifax Cty. Sch. Bd., 
    823 F.2d 832
    , 835 (4th Cir. 1987). Thus, the
    district court’s order was deemed entered, for purposes of Rule 4(a), 150 days after the date
    of entry on the docket. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 58(c)(2)(B); Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(7)(A)(ii).
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 22-7409

Filed Date: 4/25/2023

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 4/26/2023