US v. Raymond Chestnut

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion for transcript at government expense [999647116-2], denying Motion for transcript at government expense [999614940-2]; denying Motion to reconsider [999612684-2]; denying Motion for other relief [999607137-2]; denying Motion to appoint/assign counsel [999606103-2] Originating case number: 4:05-cr-01044-RBH-1 Copies to all parties and the district court. [999671096]. Mailed to: Raymond Chestnut. [15-6871]

Appeal: 15-6871

Doc: 23

Filed: 10/02/2015

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-6871

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
RAYMOND EDWARD CHESTNUT, a/k/a Snoop, a/k/a Ray,
Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Florence. R. Bryan Harwell, District Judge.
(4:05-cr-01044-RBH-1)

Submitted:

September 29, 2015

Decided:

October 2, 2015

Before SHEDD, WYNN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Raymond Edward Chestnut, Appellant Pro Se. Robert Frank Daley,
Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, Columbia, South Carolina;
Arthur
Bradley
Parham,
Assistant
United
States
Attorney,
Florence, South Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 15-6871

Doc: 23

Filed: 10/02/2015

Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Raymond Edward Chestnut seeks to appeal his 2007 criminal
judgment

imposed

distribute

and

to

following
possess

his
with

guilty
intent

plea
to

to

conspiracy

distribute

to

cocaine

base, and using and carrying firearms during and in relation to,
and possessing firearms in furtherance of, a drug trafficking
crime.

The district court entered judgment on May 18, 2007.

At

that time, Rule 4(b)(1)(A) of the Federal Rules of Appellate
Procedure required a defendant in a criminal case to file his
notice of appeal within 10 days of the entry of judgment. 1

With

or without a motion, upon a showing of excusable neglect or good
cause, the district court may grant an extension of up to 30
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).
Chestnut filed his notice of appeal in 2015, eight years
after entry of the criminal judgment. 2

Because Chestnut failed

1

Rule 4 was amended effective December 1, 2009, to
establish a 14-day appeal period.
Fed. R. App. P. 4(b)(1)(A)
(2009).
Chestnut’s notice of appeal is untimely under either
version of the rule.
2

On his certificate of service and in his informal brief,
Chestnut alleges that he mailed the notice of appeal on May 23,
2007. However, the notice of appeal is postmarked June 2, 2015,
and date stamped received by the district court clerk’s office
on June 5, 2015, and the certificate of service for the informal
brief is dated August 21, 2015. Chestnut’s representation that
he filed his notice of appeal on May 23, 2007, simply is not
credible.

2

Appeal: 15-6871

Doc: 23

Filed: 10/02/2015

Pg: 3 of 3

to file a timely notice of appeal or to obtain an extension of
the appeal period, we deny all pending motions and dismiss the
appeal as untimely. 3
facts

and

legal

We dispense with oral argument because the

contentions

are

adequately

presented

in

the

materials before this court.
DISMISSED

3

We note that the appeal period in a criminal case is not a
jurisdictional provision, but, rather, a claim-processing rule.
United States v. Urutyan, 564 F.3d 679, 685 (4th Cir. 2009).
Because Chestnut’s appeal is inordinately late, and its
consideration is not in the best interest of judicial economy,
we exercise our inherent power to dismiss it. United States v.
Mitchell, 518 F.3d 740, 744, 750 (10th Cir. 2008).

3