US v. Raymond Chestnut

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion for bail/release pending appeal (Local Rule 9(a) and (b)) [1000023605-2] Originating case number: 4:05-cr-01044-RBH-1. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [1000056309]. Mailed to: Raymond Edward Chestnut. [16-7578]

Appeal: 16-7578

Doc: 16

Filed: 04/05/2017

Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-7578

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: March 29, 2017

Decided: April 5, 2017

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Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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: 16-7578

Doc: 16

Filed: 04/05/2017

Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:
Raymond Edward Chestnut appeals the district court’s July 21, 2015 text order
denying his motion seeking a reduced sentence pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2)
(2012). In criminal cases, the defendant must file the notice of appeal within 14 days
after the entry of judgment. 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 more than a year after entry of the order he
seeks to challenge. * Because Chestnut’s appeal is inordinately late, we dismiss the
appeal as untimely filed. Chestnut’s motion for release on bond is denied. 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

*

Chestnut’s representations that he filed his notice of appeal on August 3, 2015,
simply are not credible.

2