Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • United States v. Harry Ronald Rice, 106 F.3d 393, 4th Cir. (1997)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    10 views2 pages
    This document is a court case summary from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. It dismisses an appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the appellant filed a notice of appeal over a year after the district court's order, well past the 60 day deadline. Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure require notices of appeal to be filed within strict time periods, which were not met in this case. As such, the court has no jurisdiction to consider the appeal.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1997-01-21 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Citations: 106 F.3d 393 Docket: 96-6633

    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 is a court case summary from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. It dismisses an appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the appellant filed a notice of appeal over a year after the district court's order, well past the 60 day deadline. Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure require notices of appeal to be filed within strict time periods, which were not met in this case. As such, the court has no jurisdiction to consider the appeal.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    10 views2 pages

    United States v. Harry Ronald Rice, 106 F.3d 393, 4th Cir. (1997)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document is a court case summary from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. It dismisses an appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the appellant filed a notice of appeal over a year after the district court's order, well past the 60 day deadline. Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure require notices of appeal to be filed within strict time periods, which were not met in this case. As such, the court has no jurisdiction to consider the appeal.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    of 2

    106 F.

    3d 393

    NOTICE: Fourth Circuit Local Rule 36(c) states that citation


    of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing
    res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires
    service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth
    Circuit.
    UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,
    v.
    Harry Ronald RICE, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 96-6633.

    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.


    Submitted Jan. 9, 1997.
    Decided Jan. 21, 1997.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of
    North Carolina, at Charlotte. Robert D. Potter, Senior District Judge. (CR90-114-C-P, CA-94-52-3-P)
    Harry Ronald Rice, Appellant Pro Se.
    James Michael Sullivan, Assistant United States Attorney, Gretchen C.F.
    Shappert, Assistant United States Attorney, Charlotte, North Carolina, for
    Appellee.
    Before HALL and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior
    Circuit Judge.
    PER CURIAM:

    Appellant filed an untimely notice of appeal. We dismiss for lack of


    jurisdiction. The time periods for filing notices of appeal are governed by Fed.
    R.App. P. 4. These periods are "mandatory and jurisdictional." Browder v.
    Director, Dep't of Corrections, 434 U.S. 257, 264 (1978) (quoting United States
    v. Robinson, 361 U.S. 220, 229 (1960)). Parties to civil actions have sixty days
    within which to file in the district court notices of appeal from judgments or

    final orders. Fed. R.App. P. 4(a)(1). The only exceptions to the appeal period
    are when the district court extends the time to appeal under Fed. R.App. P. 4(a)
    (5) or reopens the appeal period under Fed. R.App. P. 4(a)(6).
    2

    The district court entered its order on November 17, 1994; Appellant's notice of
    appeal was filed on April 15, 1996. Appellant's failure to note a timely appeal
    or obtain either an extension or a reopening of the appeal period leaves this
    court without jurisdiction to consider the merits of Appellant's appeal. We
    therefore dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts
    and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court
    and argument would not aid the decisional process.

    DISMISSED.

    You might also like