Case ID: f-appx_580/html/0196-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      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. Gerson Guzman MARTINEZ-TURCIO, a/k/a Jerson Martinez, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 14-6337.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: July 29, 2014.
    Decided: July 31, 2014.
    Gerson Guzman Martinez-Turcio, Appellant Pro Se. Alan Lance Crick, Assistant United States Attorney, Andrew Burke Moorman, Office of the United States Attorney, Greenville, South Carolina, for Appellee.
    Before NIEMEYER, WYNN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.
    Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.-
   PER CURIAM:

Person Guzman Martinez-Turcio seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his motion for reconsideration of a prior order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C § 2255 (2012) motion. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the notice of appeal was not timely filed.

When the United States or its officer or agency is a party, the notice of appeal must be filed no more than sixty days after the entry of the district court’s final judgment or order, Fed. R.App. P. 4(a)(1)(B), unless the district court extends the appeal period under Fed. R.App. P. 4(a)(5), or reopens the appeal period under Fed. R.App. P. 4(a)(6). “[T] he timely filing of a notice of appeal in a civil case is a jurisdictional requirement.” Bowles v. Russell, 551 U.S. 205, 214, 127 S.Ct. 2360, 168 L.Ed.2d 96 (2007).

The district court’s order was entered on the docket on December 13, 2013. The notice of appeal was filed, at the earliest, on February 25, 2014. Because Martinez-Turcio failed to file a timely notice of appeal or to obtain an extension or reopening of the appeal period, we dismiss the appeal. 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.