Court Opinion

ID: 9375084
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-02-24 21:00:54.425399+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:16:55.773054
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 21-4722      Doc: 50         Filed: 02/23/2023    Pg: 1 of 3

                                            UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                              No. 21-4722

        UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                            Plaintiff - Appellee,

                     v.

        JAMES JOHNSON,

                            Defendant - Appellant.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore.
        Richard D. Bennett, Senior District Judge. (1:18-cr-00178-RDB-1)

        Submitted: February 21, 2023                                 Decided: February 23, 2023

        Before NIEMEYER and DIAZ, Circuit Judges, and MOTZ, Senior Circuit Judge.

        Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        ON BRIEF: Alfred Guillaume III, LAW OFFICES OF ALFRED GUILLAUME III,
        Greenbelt, Maryland, for Appellant. Jason Daniel Medinger, Assistant United States
        Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Baltimore, Maryland, for
        Appellee.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 21-4722       Doc: 50          Filed: 02/23/2023      Pg: 2 of 3

        PER CURIAM:

               James Johnson pled guilty, pursuant to a written plea agreement, to conspiracy to

        distribute and possess with intent to distribute one kilogram or more of heroin and 400

        grams or more of a mixture or substance containing fentanyl, in violation of 21 U.S.C.

        § 846. The district court sentenced Johnson to 288 months’ imprisonment. Johnson’s

        counsel has filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), stating that

        there are no meritorious grounds for appeal but questioning whether the district court erred

        as a matter of law in imposing the prison term and whether that term is procedurally and

        substantively reasonable. Johnson filed a pro se supplemental brief. The Government has

        moved to dismiss the appeal as untimely.

               In criminal cases, the defendant must file the notice of appeal within 14 days after

        the entry of judgment. Fed. R. App. P. 4(b)(1)(A)(i). With or without a motion, upon a

        showing of excusable neglect or good cause, the district court may grant an extension of

        up to 30 days to file a notice of appeal. Fed. R. App. P. 4(b)(4). Although the appeal

        period in a criminal case is not a jurisdictional provision, but rather a claim-processing rule,

        United States v. Urutyan, 564 F.3d 679, 685 (4th Cir. 2009), “[w]hen the Government

        promptly invokes the rule in response to a late-filed criminal appeal, we must dismiss,”

        United States v. Oliver, 878 F.3d 120, 123 (4th Cir. 2017). When the Government moves

        to dismiss the appeal within the time required by 4th Cir. R. 27(f), this court will grant the

        motion. See United States v. Hyman, 884 F.3d 496, 500 (4th Cir. 2018).

                                                       2
USCA4 Appeal: 21-4722         Doc: 50      Filed: 02/23/2023      Pg: 3 of 3

               The district court entered the criminal judgment on March 11, 2019. Johnson filed

        the notice of appeal on December 22, 2021. 1 Because Johnson failed to file a timely notice

        of appeal or to obtain an extension of the appeal period and the Government has promptly

        invoked the appeal’s untimeliness, see 4th Cir. R. 27(f)(2), we grant the Government’s

        motion to dismiss the appeal. 2 We deny Johnson’s pro se motion to relieve counsel from

        representation.

               This court requires that counsel inform Johnson, in writing, of the right to petition

        the Supreme Court of the United States for further review. If Johnson requests that a

        petition be filed, but counsel believes that such a petition would be frivolous, then counsel

        may move in this court for leave to withdraw from representation. Counsel’s motion must

        state that a copy thereof was served on Johnson.

               We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are

        adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the

        decisional process.

                                                                                       DISMISSED

               1
                For the purpose of this appeal, we assume that the date appearing on the notice of
        appeal is the earliest date Johnson could have delivered the notice to prison officials for
        mailing to the court. Fed. R. App. P. 4(c)(1); Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266, 276 (1988).
               2
                The Government also moves to dismiss the appeal as barred by the appeal waiver
        in Johnson’s plea agreement. Because we conclude the appeal is untimely, we need not
        consider whether it is barred by the appellate waiver.

                                                     3