US v. Ray Cason

Filing 920081023


Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 07-7699 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. RAY LEE CASON, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Asheville. Lacy H. Thornburg, District Judge. (1:03-cr-00005-LHT; 1:06-cv-00301) Submitted: October 21, 2008 Decided: October 23, 2008 Before MICHAEL, TRAXLER, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Ray Lee Cason, Appellant Pro Se. Donald David Gast, Assistant United States Attorney, Asheville, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Ray Lee Cason seeks to appeal the district court's order denying relief on his motion under 28 U.S.C. 2255 (2000). We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the notice of appeal was not timely filed. When the United States or its officer or agency is a party, the notice of appeal must be filed no more than sixty days after the entry of the district court's final judgment or order, Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(B), unless the district court extends the appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5), or reopens the appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(6). "mandatory and jurisdictional." This appeal period is Browder v. Dir., Dep't of Corr., 434 U.S. 257, 264 (1978) (internal quotation marks and citations omitted). Accord Bowles v. Russell, 127 S. Ct. 2360 (2007). The district court's order was entered on the docket on May 25, 2007. In a September 11, 2007, order, the court reopened the time for filing an appeal for fourteen days following the entry of the order. The notice of appeal was filed on November 19, 2007, Because Cason failed to after the reopened appeal period expired. file a timely notice of appeal and no authority permits the court to further extend or reopen the appeal period, we dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal 2 contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. DISMISSED 3

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?