US v. Lashon Gaither

Filing 920090715

Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-6612 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. LASHON MAURICE GAITHER, a/k/a Sld Dft 5:05CR9-10-V, a/k/a Morie, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Statesville. Richard L. Voorhees, District Judge. (5:05-cr-00009-RLV-DCK-10) Submitted: June 29, 2009 Decided: July 15, 2009 Before GREGORY and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion. Lashon Maurice Gaither, Appellant Pro Se. Amy Elizabeth Ray, Assistant United States Attorney, Asheville, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Lashon Maurice Gaither seeks to appeal the district court's order denying his motion for reduction of 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 denying the motion for reduction of sentence on February 27, 2009. Gaither filed the notice of appeal on March 27, 2009, after the ten-day period expired but before the expiration the of the of thirty-day appeal was excusable neglect period. Because notice filed within the excusable neglect period, we remand the case to the district court for the court to determine whether Gaither has shown excusable of the neglect or good cause warranting The record, an as extension ten-day appeal period. See Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266, 276 (1988). 2 supplemented, will then be returned to this court for further consideration. REMANDED 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?