Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • United States v. Thompson, 4th Cir. (2006)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    1 views3 pages
    This document summarizes a United States Court of Appeals case involving Larry Edward Thompson, Jr. appealing his criminal conviction and sentence. Thompson's attorney filed an Anders brief stating there were no meritorious issues for appeal. The Court of Appeals dismisses Thompson's appeal because he failed to file a timely notice of appeal within 10 days of the district court entering judgment, as required by the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure. As Thompson did not file the notice of appeal until over 6 months after the judgment, the Court of Appeals lacks jurisdiction to hear the appeal.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2006-12-12 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 06-4089

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    This document summarizes a United States Court of Appeals case involving Larry Edward Thompson, Jr. appealing his criminal conviction and sentence. Thompson's attorney filed an Anders brief stating there were no meritorious issues for appeal. The Court of Appeals dismisses Thompson's appeal because he failed to file a timely notice of appeal within 10 days of the district court entering judgment, as required by the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure. As Thompson did not file the notice of appeal until over 6 months after the judgment, the Court of Appeals lacks jurisdiction to hear the appeal.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    1 views3 pages

    United States v. Thompson, 4th Cir. (2006)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document summarizes a United States Court of Appeals case involving Larry Edward Thompson, Jr. appealing his criminal conviction and sentence. Thompson's attorney filed an Anders brief stating there were no meritorious issues for appeal. The Court of Appeals dismisses Thompson's appeal because he failed to file a timely notice of appeal within 10 days of the district court entering judgment, as required by the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure. As Thompson did not file the notice of appeal until over 6 months after the judgment, the Court of Appeals lacks jurisdiction to hear the appeal.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    of 3

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 06-4089

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    versus
    LARRY EDWARD THOMPSON, JR.,
    Defendant - Appellant.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of North Carolina, at Raleigh.
    James C. Fox, Senior
    District Judge. (CR-04-305)

    Submitted:

    November 27, 2006

    Decided:

    December 12, 2006

    Before WILKINSON and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior


    Circuit Judge.

    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    George Mason Oliver, STUBBS & PERDUE, P.A., New Bern, North
    Carolina, for Appellant. Anne Margaret Hayes, Assistant United
    States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    Larry

    Edward

    conviction and sentence.

    Thompson,

    Jr.,

    seeks

    to

    appeal

    his

    Thompsons attorney has filed a brief in

    accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), stating


    that there are no meritorious issues for appeal.
    filed

    pro

    se

    supplemental

    brief.

    In

    Thompson has

    criminal

    cases,

    the

    defendant must file the notice of appeal within ten days after the
    entry of judgment.

    Fed. R. App. P. 4(b)(1)(A).

    With or without a

    motion, upon a showing of excusable neglect or good cause, the


    district court may grant an extension of up to thirty 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).


    The district court entered judgment on April 18, 2005.
    The notice of appeal was filed on October 5, 2005.
    Lack, 487 U.S. 266 (1988).

    See Houston v.

    Because Thompson failed to file a

    timely notice of appeal or obtain an extension of the appeal


    period, we dismiss the appeal.

    This court requires that counsel

    inform his client, in writing, of his right to petition the Supreme


    Court of the United States for further review.

    If the client

    requests that a petition be filed, but counsel believes that such


    a petition would be frivolous, then counsel may move in this court
    for leave to withdraw from representation.

    Counsels motion must

    state that a copy thereof was served on the client.

    Finally, we

    dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions

    - 2 -

    are adequately presented in the materials before the court and


    argument would not aid the decisional process.

    DISMISSED

    - 3 -

    You might also like