US v. Derrick Muse
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. DERRICK ANTRON MUSE, a/k/a D, Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Robert E. Payne, Senior District Judge. (3:05-cr-00502-REP-1)
January 7, 2009
January 14, 2009
Before MICHAEL and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Derrick Antron Muse, Appellant Pro Se. Sara Elizabeth Chase, Assistant United States Attorney, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM: Derrick court's order Antron Muse his seeks to appeal reduction the of district sentence
under 18 U.S.C. § 3582 (2006).
In criminal cases, the defendant
must file the notice of appeal within ten days after the entry of judgment. Fed. R. App. P. 4(b)(1)(A); see United States v.
Alvarez, 210 F.3d 309, 310 (5th Cir. 2000) (holding that § 3582 proceeding applies). is criminal in nature and ten-day appeal period
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 granting the
motion for reduction of sentence on June 27, 2008. of appeal was filed on August 22, 2008. *
Because Muse failed to
file a timely notice of appeal or to obtain an extension of the appeal period, we dismiss the appeal. 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
See Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266, 276 (1988).
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?