Case ID: f-appx_201/html/0172-01.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. Ron Christopher MILES, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 06-6745.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: Sept. 26, 2006.
    Decided: Sept. 29, 2006.
    Ron Christopher Miles, Appellant Pro Se. Christine Witcover Dean, Assistant United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.
    
      Before WIDENER and WILKINSON, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
    Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).
   PER CURIAM.

Ron Christopher Miles seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his motion to modify and/or correct sentence, and his motion for reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly we affirm. 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.

AFFIRMED. 
      
       Miles's notice of appeal listed only the district court’s order denying his motion for reconsideration. His informal brief states that he is also appealing the district court’s order revoking his supervised release and a subsequent order denying his motion for clarification. In criminal cases, the defendant must file the notice of appeal within ten days after the entry of judgment. Fed. R.App. P. 4(b)(1)(A). With or without a motion, upon a showing of excusable neglect or good cause, the district court may grant an extension of up to thirty days to file a notice of appeal. Fed. R.App. P. 4(b)(4); United States v. Reyes, 759 F.2d 351, 353 (4th Cir. 1985). The district court entered its order revoking supervised release on June 10, 2005, and its order denying Miles’ motion for clarification on December 6, 2005. The notice of appeal was filed on April 19, 2006. Because Miles failed to file a timely notice of appeal or to obtain an extension of the appeal period, we lack jurisdiction to review the district court’s orders revoking Miles’ supervised release and denying his motion for clarification.