Caesarea James v. Anne Carter

Filing

OPINION/ORDER DIRECTING LIMITED REMAND filed by DGM, RLG and AKD [4CCA retains jurisdiction]. Originating case number: 2:14-cv-00042-JPB-JES Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. Mailed to: Caesarea Develle James. [999633535] [15-6154]

Appeal: 15-6154

Doc: 8

Filed: 08/04/2015

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-6154

CAESAREA DEVELLE JAMES, JR.,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
ANNE MARY CARTER, The Warden of MCI
Correctional Institution of Morgantown,

of

the

Federal

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern
District of West Virginia, at Elkins.
John Preston Bailey,
District Judge. (2:14-cv-00042-JPB-JES)

Submitted:

June 18, 2015

Decided:

August 4, 2015

Before MOTZ, GREGORY, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Caesarea Develle James, Jr., Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 15-6154

Doc: 8

Filed: 08/04/2015

Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Caesarea Develle James, Jr., a federal prisoner, seeks to
appeal

the

district

court’s

order

accepting

the

magistrate

judge’s recommendation and denying relief on James’ 28 U.S.C.
§ 2241 (2012) petition.

In a civil case in which the United

States or its officer or agency is a party, parties have 60 days
following the entry of the district court’s final judgment or
order in which to file a notice of appeal.
4(a)(1)(B).

Fed. R. App. P.

However, if a party moves for an extension of time

to appeal within 30 days after expiration of the original appeal
period

and

demonstrates

excusable

neglect

or

good

cause,

a

district court may extend the time to file a notice of appeal.
Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5)(A); Washington v. Bumgarner, 882 F.2d
899, 900–01 (4th Cir. 1989).
The district court’s final order was entered on October 29,
2014.
the

James filed his notice of appeal after the expiration of
60-day

excusable

appeal

neglect

period
period. *

but

possibly

Because

within

James’

notice

the

30-day

of

appeal

offered some excuse for his untimeliness, we construe it as a

*

Pursuant to Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266 (1988), James’
notice of appeal is deemed filed when he deposited it with
prison officials for mailing.
Id. at 276.
James did not date
his notice of appeal; however, the postmark date is January 29,
2015. It is possible that James timely deposited it for mailing
on January 28, 2015, or before.

2

Appeal: 15-6154

request

Doc: 8

for

appeal.

Filed: 08/04/2015

an

extension

of

Pg: 3 of 3

time

accompanying

his

notice

of

Accordingly, we remand this case to the district court

for the limited purpose of determining whether James’ motion for
extension of time was timely filed and, if so, whether he has
demonstrated
extension

of

excusable
the

neglect

60-day

or

appeal

good

cause

period.

warranting

The

record,

an
as

supplemented, will then be returned to this court for further
consideration.
REMANDED

3