Warren Russell v. Warden Reynold
Filing
OPINION/ORDER DIRECTING LIMITED REMAND [4CCA retains jurisdiction]. Originating case number: 9:14-cv-04035-JMC Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. Mailed to: Warren Russell. [999968978] [16-6694]
Appeal: 16-6694
Doc: 7
Filed: 11/16/2016
Pg: 1 of 2
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 16-6694
WARREN RUSSELL,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
WARDEN REYNOLDS,
Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Beaufort.
J. Michelle Childs, District
Judge. (9:14-cv-04035-JMC)
Submitted:
October 20, 2016
Decided:
November 16, 2016
Before MOTZ, TRAXLER, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.
Remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Warren Russell, Appellant Pro Se.
Donald John Zelenka, Senior
Assistant
Attorney
General,
Melody
Jane
Brown,
Assistant
Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Appeal: 16-6694
Doc: 7
Filed: 11/16/2016
Pg: 2 of 2
PER CURIAM:
Warren Russell seeks to appeal the district court’s order
adopting
the
magistrate
relief
on
Russell’s
notice
of
appeal
after
expiration
28
was
of
judge’s
U.S.C.
received
the
recommendation
§ 2254
in
appeal
the
(2012)
denying
petition.
district
period.
and
court
Because
The
shortly
Russell
is
incarcerated, the notice is considered filed as of the date it
was properly delivered to prison officials for mailing to the
court.
Fed. R. App. P. 4(c)(1); Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266
(1988).
The record does not reveal when Russell gave the notice
of
appeal
to
prison
officials
for
mailing.
Accordingly,
we
remand the case for the limited purpose of allowing the district
court
to
obtain
this
information
from
the
parties
and
to
determine whether the filing was timely under Fed. R. App. P.
4(c)(1) and
Houston v. Lack.
The record, as supplemented, will
then be returned to this court for further consideration.
REMANDED
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?