Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca4-09-07391/USCOURTS-ca4-09-07391-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Martin F. Salazar
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 09-7391

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

MARTIN F. SALAZAR,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of 

South Carolina, at Aiken. Margaret B. Seymour, District Judge. 

(1:06-cr-00123-MBS-1)

Submitted: March 19, 2010 Decided: April 8, 2010

Before KING, SHEDD, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Martin F. Salazar, Appellant Pro Se. Dean A. Eichelberger, 

Assistant United States Attorney, Columbia, South Carolina, for 

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 09-7391 Doc: 21 Filed: 04/08/2010 Pg: 1 of 3
2

PER CURIAM:

Martin F. Salazar appeals the denial of his motion for 

a new trial. 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).*

The district court entered its order on June 29, 2009. 

The ten-day appeal period expired on July 14. See Fed. R. App. 

P. 26(a)(2) (providing “intermediate Saturdays, Sundays, and 

legal holidays” are excluded when time period is less than 

eleven days). The thirty-day excusable neglect period expired 

on August 13. On July 24, Salazar filed a document entitled 

“Motion to Appeal and Request for Extension to File Appeal.” He 

stated that he did not receive the court’s order until July 8, 

2009, and that legal services were not available. His 

certificate of service stated that he mailed his notice of 

appeal on July 22.

 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).

 * Because Salazar’s notice of appeal was filed before the 

December 2009 Amendments to the Federal Rules of Appellate 

Procedure, we evaluate the timeliness of his appeal under the 

rules in effect when he filed his notice of appeal.

Appeal: 09-7391 Doc: 21 Filed: 04/08/2010 Pg: 2 of 3
3

Thus, while Salazar’s notice of appeal was not filed 

within the ten-day appeal period, it was filed during the 

thirty-day extension period. In addition, in Salazar’s notice 

of appeal, he explicitly requested an extension of time. The 

district court did not rule on this motion.

Because Salazar filed his notice of appeal within the 

excusable neglect period and requested an extension of time, we 

remand the case to the district court for the court to determine 

whether Salazar 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: 09-7391 Doc: 21 Filed: 04/08/2010 Pg: 3 of 3