Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • United States v. Carl F. Linder, JR., 918 F.2d 956, 4th Cir. (1990)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    6 views2 pages
    This document summarizes a court case from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. Carl Linder Jr. appealed the denial of his motion challenging his sentence for conspiring to manufacture and distribute an illegal drug. The Court of Appeals dismissed the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because Linder's notice of appeal was filed over 60 days after the district court's order, which is past the deadline. The time limits for filing an appeal are mandatory and jurisdictional, so the late filing deprived the court of the ability to consider the case. The court also declined to remand to determine if more time could be given for the appeal, finding the appeal lacked merit.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1990-11-26 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Citations: 918 F.2d 956 Docket: 90-6628

    Original Title

    United States v. Carl F. Linder, Jr., 918 F.2d 956, 4th Cir. (1990)

    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 court case from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. Carl Linder Jr. appealed the denial of his motion challenging his sentence for conspiring to manufacture and distribute an illegal drug. The Court of Appeals dismissed the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because Linder's notice of appeal was filed over 60 days after the district court's order, which is past the deadline. The time limits for filing an appeal are mandatory and jurisdictional, so the late filing deprived the court of the ability to consider the case. The court also declined to remand to determine if more time could be given for the appeal, finding the appeal lacked merit.

    Copyright:

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

    United States v. Carl F. Linder, JR., 918 F.2d 956, 4th Cir. (1990)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document summarizes a court case from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. Carl Linder Jr. appealed the denial of his motion challenging his sentence for conspiring to manufacture and distribute an illegal drug. The Court of Appeals dismissed the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because Linder's notice of appeal was filed over 60 days after the district court's order, which is past the deadline. The time limits for filing an appeal are mandatory and jurisdictional, so the late filing deprived the court of the ability to consider the case. The court also declined to remand to determine if more time could be given for the appeal, finding the appeal lacked merit.

    Copyright:

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

    918 F.

    2d 956
    Unpublished Disposition

    NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 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.
    Carl F. LINDER, Jr., Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 90-6628.

    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.


    Submitted Oct. 18, 1990.
    Decided Nov. 26, 1990.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland,
    at Baltimore. Walter E. Black, Jr., District Judge. (CA-89-3527-B; CR-88196-B)
    Carl F. Linder, Jr., appellant pro se.
    Breckinridge Long Willcox, United States Attorney, Baltimore, Md., for
    appellee.
    D.Md.
    DISMISSED.
    Before PHILLIPS, SPROUSE and NIEMEYER, Circuit Judges.
    PER CURIAM:

    Carl F. Linder, Jr. brought this 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2241 or in the alternative 28
    U.S.C. Sec. 2255 motion challenging the sentence he received for pleading
    guilty to conspiring to manufacture, distribute, and possess with intent to
    distribute the pyrolidine analog of phencyclidine. We dismiss the appeal for

    lack of jurisdiction.
    2

    The district court entered its order denying the motion on May 10, 1990.
    Linder's notice of appeal was dated July 22, 1990, and received by the district
    court on July 25, 1990. Because Linder did not submit his notice of appeal to
    prison authorities until over sixty days after the district court's order was
    entered, the appeal was untimely. See Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266 (1988)
    (inmate's notice of appeal is filed when it is given to prison authorities for
    mailing to the district court).

    The time periods established by Fed.R.App.P. 4 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)). Linder's
    failure to note a timely appeal deprives this Court of jurisdiction to consider this
    case. 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.

    We decline to remand for a determination as to whether Linder should be given


    an extension of time to appeal. After a review of the record on appeal and the
    district court's opinion, we have found that a remand would serve no purpose
    since Linder's appeal is without merit

    You might also like