Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Derrick Antron MUSE, a/k/a D, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2009-01-14
Citations: 306 F. App'x 816
Docket Number: No. 08-7971
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Derrick Antron MUSE, a/k/a D, Defendant—Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 306
Pages: 816–817

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Derrick Antron MUSE, a/k/a D, Defendant—Appellant.
No. 08-7971.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Jan. 7, 2009.
Decided: Jan. 14, 2009.
Derrick Antron Muse, Appellant Pro Se. Sara Elizabeth Chase, Assistant United States Attorney, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.
Before MICHAEL and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Derrick Antron Muse seeks to appeal the district court's order granting his motion for reduction of sentence under 18 U.S.C. § 3582 (2006). 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); see United States v. Alvarez, 210 F.3d 309, 310 (5th Cir.2000) (holding that § 3582 proceeding is criminal in nature and ten-day appeal period applies). 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 granting the motion for reduction of sentence on June 27, 2008. The notice of appeal was filed on August 22, 2008. Because Muse failed to file a timely notice of appeal or to obtain an extension of the appeal period, we dismiss the appeal. 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.
See Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266, 276, 108 S.Ct. 2379, 101 L.Ed.2d 245 (1988).