Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca4-09-07252/USCOURTS-ca4-09-07252-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Alberto Espinosa
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 09-7252

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

ALBERTO ESPINOSA,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of 

Maryland, at Greenbelt. Alexander Williams, Jr., District 

Judge. (8:97-cr-00343-AW-13)

Submitted: May 20, 2010 Decided: June 10, 2010

Before MOTZ and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior 

Circuit Judge.

Remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Alberto Espinosa, Appellant Pro Se. Deborah A. Johnston, 

Assistant United States Attorney, Greenbelt, Maryland, for 

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 09-7252 Doc: 12 Filed: 06/10/2010 Pg: 1 of 2
2

PER CURIAM:

Alberto Espinosa seeks to appeal the district court’s 

order denying his motion to unseal records. In criminal cases

prior to December 1, 2009, 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 judgment on June 11, 2009. 

At the earliest, Espinosa filed the notice of appeal on June 29, 

2009, after the ten-day period expired but within the thirty-day 

excusable neglect period. Because the notice of appeal was 

filed within the excusable neglect period, we remand the case to 

the district court for the court to determine whether Espinosa

has shown excusable neglect or good cause warranting an 

extension of the ten-day appeal period. The record, as 

supplemented, will then be returned to this court for further 

consideration.

REMANDED

Appeal: 09-7252 Doc: 12 Filed: 06/10/2010 Pg: 2 of 2