Case ID: f-appx_35/html/0087-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Margoretti RUCKER, a/k/a Major, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 01-4339.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted May 16, 2002.
    Decided May 22, 2002.
    Jacqueline A. Hallman, Hallinan Law Office, Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellant. Samuel David Marsh, Assistant United States Attorney, Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellee.
    Before NIEMEYER, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.
    Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
   PER CURIAM.

Margoretti Rucker seeks to appeal the district court’s order entered pursuant to his criminal conviction. The Government has moved to dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because Appellant’s notice of appeal was not timely filed.

Criminal defendants have ten days from the entry of the district court’s final judgment or order to note an appeal, see Fed. R.App. P. 4(b), unless the district court extends the appeal period under Fed. R.App. P. 4(b)(4). This appeal period is “mandatory and jurisdictional.” Browder v. Director, Dep’t of Corrections, 434 U.S. 257, 264, 98 S.Ct. 556, 54 L.Ed.2d 521 (1978) (quoting United States v. Robinson, 361 U.S. 220, 229, 80 S.Ct. 282, 4 L.Ed.2d 259 (1960)).

The district court’s order was entered on the docket on May 11, 2000. Rucker’s notice of appeal was dated April 22, 2001, and filed on May 2, 2001. Because Rucker failed to file a timely notice of appeal or to obtain an extension of the appeal period, we grant the Government’s motion and 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.