US v. Darron Owens

Filing 920090611

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 08-7009

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. DARRON OWENS, Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Orangeburg. Cameron McGowan Currie, District Judge. (5:01-cr-00084-CMC)

Submitted:

May 15, 2009

Decided:

June 11, 2009

Before MICHAEL, TRAXLER, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Darron Owens, Appellant Pro Se. Stacey Denise Haynes, Assistant United States Attorney, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM: Darron order denying Owens seeks for to appeal the of district sentence court's under 18

his

motion

reduction

U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2006).

In criminal cases, the defendant

must file the notice of appeal within ten days after the entry of judgment. Alvarez, 210 is Fed. R. App. P. 4(b)(1)(A); see United States v. F.3d 309, 310 in (5th nature Cir. and 2000) (holding appeal § 3582 period

proceeding applies).

criminal

ten-day

With or without a motion, upon a showing of excusable

neglect or good cause, the district court may grant an extension of up to thirty days to file a notice of appeal. 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 denying the

motion for reduction of sentence on May 20, 2008. the notice of appeal on June 12, 2008.

Owens filed

Because Owens failed to

file a timely notice of appeal or obtain an extension of the appeal period, we remanded this case to the district court for the court to determine whether Owens could demonstrate excusable neglect or good cause to justify extending the ten-day appeal For the purpose of this appeal, we assume that the date appearing on the notice of appeal is the earliest date it could have been properly delivered to prison officials for mailing to the court. Fed. R. App. P. 4(c); Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266 (1988).

2

period.

In accordance with our remand order, the district court

received evidence pertaining to the issue and determined that Owens failed to make the requisite showing. We have thoroughly reviewed the record and agree that Owens has failed to demonstrate excusable neglect or good cause justifying a relaxation of the ten-day appeal period set forth in Rule 4(b)(1)(A). 205, __, 127 S. Ct. See generally Bowles v. Russell, 551 U.S. 2360, 2363-66 (2007); United States v.

Mitchell, 518 F.3d 740, 750 (10th Cir. 2008). dismiss the appeal. facts and legal before

Accordingly, we

We dispense with oral argument because the are and adequately argument presented not in aid the the

contentions the court

materials

would

decisional process. DISMISSED

3