US v. Kevin McDaniel

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion for bail/release pending appeal (Local Rule 9(a) and (b)) [999803189-2], denying Motion for bail/release pending appeal (Local Rule 9(a) and (b)) [999797084-2], denying Motion for bail/release pending appeal (Local Rule 9(a) and (b)) [999791621-2], denying Motion for bail/release pending appeal (Local Rule 9(a) and (b)) [999789978-2], denying Motion for bail/release pending appeal (Local Rule 9(a) and (b)) [999778526-2], denying Motion for bail/release pending appeal (Local Rule 9(a) and (b)) [999773587-3], denying Motion for bail/release pending appeal (Local Rule 9(a) and (b)) [999773585-2]; denying Motion to amend/correct [999778528-2]; denying Motion to appoint/assign counsel [999773587-2]; denying Motion to reduce supervised release [999773587-4], denying Motion for counsel to file a Rule 35 motion [999769160-2]; denying Motion to expedite decision [999760390-2] Originating case number: 7:06-cr-00036-HMH-1, 7:15-cv-02671-HMH. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999804368]. Mailed to: Kevin McDaniels. [15-7924]

Appeal: 15-7924

Doc: 18

Filed: 04/26/2016

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-7924

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
KEVIN WAYNE MCDANIELS,
Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Spartanburg.
Henry M. Herlong, Jr., Senior
District Judge. (7:06-cr-00036-HMH-1; 7:15-cv-02671-HMH)

Submitted:

April 21, 2016

Decided:

April 26, 2016

Before WILKINSON, KING, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Kevin Wayne McDaniels, Appellant Pro Se. Alan Lance Crick,
Assistant United States Attorney, Greenville, South Carolina,
for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 15-7924

Doc: 18

Filed: 04/26/2016

Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Kevin Wayne McDaniels seeks to appeal the district court’s
order

dismissing

motion.

as

successive

his

28

U.S.C.

§

2255

(2012)

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 60 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).

“[T]he timely

filing of a notice of appeal in a civil case is a jurisdictional
requirement.”

Bowles v. Russell, 551 U.S. 205, 214 (2007).

The district court’s order was entered on the docket on
July 7, 2015.

The notice of appeal was filed, at the earliest,

on November 17, 2015.

Because McDaniels failed to file a timely

notice of appeal or to obtain an extension or reopening of the
appeal

period,

we

dismiss

the

appeal.

We

deny

McDaniels’

motions to expedite, to appoint counsel, to amend exhibits, and
for

bail

or

release

pending

appeal.

We

dispense

with

oral

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately
presented in the materials before this court and argument would
not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED
2

Appeal: 15-7924

Doc: 18

Filed: 04/26/2016

Pg: 3 of 3

3