Court Opinion

ID: 9381457
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-03-22 21:01:09.019457+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:17:32.823046
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 22-7378      Doc: 9         Filed: 03/21/2023    Pg: 1 of 2

                                             UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                               No. 22-7378

        UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                             Plaintiff - Appellee,

                      v.

        MARTINEZ ORLANDIS BLACK,

                             Defendant - Appellant.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at
        Charlotte. Robert J. Conrad, Jr., District Judge. (3:06-cr-00364-RJC-1; 3:09-cv-00121-
        RJC)

        Submitted: March 16, 2023                                         Decided: March 21, 2023

        Before WILKINSON, AGEE, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.

        Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        Martinez Orlandis Black, Appellant Pro Se.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 22-7378         Doc: 9      Filed: 03/21/2023     Pg: 2 of 2

        PER CURIAM:

               Martinez Orlandis Black seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing his 28

        U.S.C. § 2255 motion as untimely. 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 in a civil case, the notice

        of appeal must be filed no more than 60 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 entered its order on April 27, 2009. Black filed the notice of

        appeal on November 17, 2022. * Because Black failed to file a timely notice of appeal or

        to obtain an extension or reopening 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 this court and argument would not aid the

        decisional process.

                                                                                       DISMISSED

               *
                For the purpose of this appeal, we assume that the date appearing on the notice of
        appeal is the earliest date Black 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