Filed: Apr. 26, 2001
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-6069 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus RAUL DIAZ-GARCIA, a/k/a Jose Cardenas Saucedo, a/k/a Arnulfo Carrera-Gonzales, a/k/a Jose Alcantor Garcia, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Durham. Paul Trevor Sharp, Magistrate Judge. (CR-99-261) Submitted: April 13, 2001 Decided: April 26, 2001 Before WILKINS, MICHAEL, and GREGORY,
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-6069 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus RAUL DIAZ-GARCIA, a/k/a Jose Cardenas Saucedo, a/k/a Arnulfo Carrera-Gonzales, a/k/a Jose Alcantor Garcia, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Durham. Paul Trevor Sharp, Magistrate Judge. (CR-99-261) Submitted: April 13, 2001 Decided: April 26, 2001 Before WILKINS, MICHAEL, and GREGORY, ..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 01-6069
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
RAUL DIAZ-GARCIA, a/k/a Jose Cardenas Saucedo,
a/k/a Arnulfo Carrera-Gonzales, a/k/a Jose
Alcantor Garcia,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle Dis-
trict of North Carolina, at Durham. Paul Trevor Sharp, Magistrate
Judge. (CR-99-261)
Submitted: April 13, 2001 Decided: April 26, 2001
Before WILKINS, MICHAEL, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Raul Diaz-Garcia, Appellant Pro Se. Sandra Jane Hairston, Assistant
United States Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Raul Diaz-Garcia seeks to appeal the district court’s order
denying his motion for transcripts. We dismiss the appeal for lack
of jurisdiction because the notice of appeal was not timely filed.
Rule 4(b) of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure requires
a notice of appeal in a criminal case to be filed within ten days
of the entry of the order. The appeal period established by Rule
4(b) is “mandatory and jurisdictional.” See United States v.
Raynor,
939 F.2d 191, 197 (4th Cir. 1991).
The district court’s order from which Diaz-Garcia seeks to
appeal was entered on the docket on August 1, 2000. His notice of
appeal was filed on November 9, 2000. Because Diaz-Garcia failed
to file a timely notice of appeal or to obtain an extension or re-
opening of the appeal period, we deny leave to file in forma pau-
peris and 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 in the
decisional process.
DISMISSED
2