Jamar Brice v. US

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 3:03-cr-00036-FDW-9,3:12-cv-00525-FDW Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999245622]. Mailed to: J. Brice. [13-7494]

Appeal: 13-7494

Doc: 6

Filed: 11/22/2013

Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 13-7494

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
JAMAR BRICE, a/k/a Esco,
Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of North Carolina, at Charlotte.
Frank D. Whitney,
Chief District Judge. (3:03-cr-00036-FDW-9; 3:12-cv-00525-FDW)

Submitted:

November 19, 2013

Before WYNN and
Circuit Judge.

FLOYD,

Circuit

Decided: November 22, 2013

Judges,

and

HAMILTON,

Senior

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Jamar Brice,
United States
Cave, OFFICE
Carolina, for

Appellant Pro Se.
Amy Elizabeth Ray, Assistant
Attorney, Asheville, North Carolina; Keith Michael
OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Charlotte, North
Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 13-7494

Doc: 6

Filed: 11/22/2013

Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:
Jamar Brice seeks to appeal the district court’s order
dismissing his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2013) motion.

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).
timely

filing

of

a

notice

of

jurisdictional requirement.”

appeal

in

a

civil

“[T]he

case

is

a

Bowles v. Russell, 551 U.S. 205,

214 (2007).
The district court’s order was entered on the docket
on November 26, 2012.

The notice of appeal was filed, at the

earliest, on August 26, 2013.

Because Brice failed to file a

timely notice of appeal or to obtain an extension or reopening
of the appeal period, we dismiss the appeal.
oral

argument

adequately

because

presented

in

the
the

facts

and

materials

legal
before

We dispense with
contentions
this

court

are
and

argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED

2