Case ID: f-appx_31/html/0258-01.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. Martell WHITAKER, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 01-5016.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted March 21, 2002.
    Decided March 27, 2002.
    Martell Whitaker, Appellant Pro Se. Jane Barrett Taylor, Office of the United States Attorney, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.
    Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.
    Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
   PER CURIAM.

Martell Whitaker appeals his sentence for money laundering, in violation of 18 U.S.C.A. § 1956 (West 1994 & Supp.2000). We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because Whitaker’s notice of appeal was not timely filed.

In criminal cases, the defendant is accorded ten days after entry of the district court’s final judgment or order to note an appeal, see Fed. R.App. P. 4(b)(1)(A), unless the district court extends the appeal period under Fed. R.App. P. 4(b)(4). This appeal period is “mandatory and jurisdictional.” United States v. Raynor, 939 F.2d 191, 196 (4th Cir.1991); United States v. Schuchardt, 685 F.2d 901, 902 (4th Cir. 1982).

The district court’s final judgment was entered on the docket on December 10, 1999. Whitaker’s notice of appeal was filed on December 17, 2001. Because Whitaker failed to file a timely notice of appeal or to obtain an extension of the appeal period, we dismiss the appeal. We deny Whitaker’s motions for discovery and for appointment of counsel. 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. 
      
       This is Whitaker's second appeal in this matter. His sentence was originally affirmed by this Court on December 18, 2000. United States v. Whitaker, No. 99-4791, 2000 WL 1846272 (4th Cir. Dec. 18, 2000) (unpublished).