US v. Ronald Couch, Jr.
Filing
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 2:98-cr-00099-HCM-1 Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998548263]. Mailed to: Ronald Couch. [11-6061]
US v. Ronald Couch, Jr.
Doc. 0
Case: 11-6061
Document: 13
Date Filed: 03/18/2011
Page: 1
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 11-6061
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff Appellee, v. RONALD LEE COUCH, JR., a/k/a D, a/k/a Diablo, Defendant Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Henry Coke Morgan, Jr., Senior District Judge. (2:98-cr-00099-HCM-1)
Submitted:
February 4, 2011
Decided:
March 18, 2011
Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Ronald Lee Couch, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Kevin Michael Comstock, Assistant United States Attorney, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Dockets.Justia.com
Case: 11-6061
Document: 13
Date Filed: 03/18/2011
Page: 2
PER CURIAM: Ronald Lee Couch, Jr. seeks to appeal his conviction and sentence. notice of In criminal cases, the defendant must file the within R. App. fourteen P. days after With the or entry without of a
appeal Fed.
judgment.
4(b)(1)(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 1999. The district notice of court appeal entered was judgment on on January 3, 12,
filed
January
2011. *
Because the notice of appeal was not timely filed, 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
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
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?