Case ID: f-appx_704/html/0267-01.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. Kimberly Dawn PALMER, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 17-4407
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: November 20, 2017
    Decided: November 28, 2017
    Kimberly Dawn Palmer, Appellant Pro Se. Jill Westmoreland Rose, United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Charlotte, North Carolina; John Daren Pritchard, Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Asheville, North Carolina, for Appellee.
    Before SHEDD, DIAZ, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.
   Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

In December 2014, the district court sentenced Kimberly Dawn Palmer to 168 months’ imprisonment pursuant to her guilty plea to a drug-related offense. In May 2017, Palmer noted an appeal of the criminal judgment pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3742(a) (2012). The district clerk failed to send a copy of Palmer’s notice of appeal to this court, as required under Fed. R. App. P. 3(d)(1). Instead, the district court denied relief on Palmer’s filing, noting that her appeal was untimely filed and that the appeal period is mandatory and jurisdictional. In June 2017, Palmer filed a notice of appeal from the court’s order denying relief, which is now before us.

Because Palmer’s first notice of appeal was not properly docketed, we remand to the district court for the limited purpose of docketing Palmer’s May 2017 pleading as a notice of appeal of the December 2014 criminal judgment. The record, as supplemented, will then be returned to this court for further consideration.

REMANDED 
      
       Although the appeal period in civil matters is mandatory and jurisdictional, the appeal period in criminal cases is a non-jurisdictional claims processing rule. See Fed. R. App. P. 4(a), (b); Bowles v. Russell, 551 U.S. 205, 214, 127 S.Ct. 2360, 168 L.Ed.2d 96 (2007); United States v. Urutyan, 564 F.3d 679, 685 (4th Cir. 2009). Moreover, the district court did not have the authority to dismiss a notice of appeal. Camby v. Davis, 718 F.2d 198, 200 n.2 (4th Cir. 1983).