Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca4-10-06359/USCOURTS-ca4-10-06359-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Terrance Jermaine Hodge
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 10-6359

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff – Appellee,

v.

TERRANCE JERMAINE HODGE,

Defendant – Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. W. Earl Britt, Senior

District Judge. (5:08-cr-00059-BR-1; 5:09-cv-00503-BR)

Submitted: July 27, 2010 Decided: August 5, 2010

Before TRAXLER, Chief Judge, and WILKINSON and KEENAN, Circuit 

Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Terrance Jermaine Hodge, Appellant Pro Se. Eric David Goulian, 

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Rudolf A. Renfer, Jr., 

Stephen Aubrey West, Assistant United States Attorneys, Raleigh, 

North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 10-6359 Doc: 8 Filed: 08/05/2010 Pg: 1 of 3
2

PER CURIAM:

Terrance Jermaine Hodge seeks to appeal the district 

court’s order denying Hodge’s motion to vacate his sentence 

pursuant to 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2010). We dismiss 

the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the notice of appeal 

was not timely filed. 

When the United States or its officer or agency is a 

party, the notice of appeal must be filed no more than sixty 

days after the entry of the district court’s final judgment or 

order, Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(B), unless the district court 

extends the appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5), or 

reopens the appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(6). “[T]he 

timely filing of a notice of appeal in a civil case is a 

jurisdictional requirement.” Bowles v. Russell, 551 U.S. 205, 

214 (2007).

The district court’s order was entered on the docket 

on December 3, 2009. The notice of appeal was filed on March 1, 

2010.*

 * For the purpose of this appeal, we assume that the date 

appearing on the notice of appeal is the earliest date it could 

have been properly delivered to prison officials for mailing to 

the court. Fed. R. App. P. 4(c); Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266 

(1988). 

 Because Hodge failed to file a timely notice of appeal or 

to obtain an extension or reopening of the appeal period, we 

dismiss the appeal. We deny Hodge’s motion for a certificate of 

Appeal: 10-6359 Doc: 8 Filed: 08/05/2010 Pg: 2 of 3
3

appealability. 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

Appeal: 10-6359 Doc: 8 Filed: 08/05/2010 Pg: 3 of 3