US v. Francis David Sherman
Filing
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 1:10-cr-00039-JPJ-RSB-1,1:13-cv-80587-JPJ-RSB Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999705765]. Mailed to: Francis David Sherman UNITED STATES PENITENTIARY USP COLEMAN II P. O. Box 1034 Coleman, FL 33521-0879. [15-7483]
<![CDATA[
Appeal: 15-7483
Doc: 8
Filed: 11/24/2015
Pg: 1 of 2
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 15-7483
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
FRANCIS DAVID SHERMAN,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of Virginia, at Abingdon.
James P. Jones, District
Judge. (1:10-cr-00039-JPJ-RSB-1; 1:13-cv-80587-JPJ-RSB)
Submitted:
November 19, 2015
Decided:
November 24, 2015
Before NIEMEYER, KING, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Francis David Sherman, Appellant Pro Se.
Zachary T. Lee,
Assistant United States Attorney, Abingdon, Virginia, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Appeal: 15-7483
Doc: 8
Filed: 11/24/2015
Pg: 2 of 2
PER CURIAM:
Francis David Sherman appeals the district court’s order
denying his motion to reopen the period to note an appeal from
the
district
court’s
order
§ 2255 (2012) motion.
denying
relief
on
his
28
U.S.C.
Sherman’s motion asserted that he did not
receive a copy of the district court’s order denying his 28
U.S.C.
§ 2255
motion.
Because
Sherman
filed
his
motion
to
reopen the period to note an appeal more than 180 days after the
district court’s order denying his § 2255 motion, the district
court lacked authority to reopen the appeal period.
See Fed. R.
Civ. P. 77(d)(2); Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(6).
Accordingly,
dispense
with
contentions
are
we
oral
affirm
the
argument
adequately
district
because
presented
in
court’s
the
the
facts
order.
We
and
legal
materials
before
this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
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?
