Filed: Sep. 18, 2000
Latest Update: Feb. 12, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-6885 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus JERMAINE JERRELL SIMS, a/k/a Justice, a/k/a Jus, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Richard L. Williams, Senior District Judge. (CR-98-45) Submitted: August 30, 2000 Decided: September 18, 2000 Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curi
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-6885 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus JERMAINE JERRELL SIMS, a/k/a Justice, a/k/a Jus, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Richard L. Williams, Senior District Judge. (CR-98-45) Submitted: August 30, 2000 Decided: September 18, 2000 Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curia..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 00-6885
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
JERMAINE JERRELL SIMS, a/k/a Justice, a/k/a
Jus,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Richmond. Richard L. Williams, Senior
District Judge. (CR-98-45)
Submitted: August 30, 2000 Decided: September 18, 2000
Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Jermaine Jerrell Sims, Appellant Pro Se. Kenneth E. Melson, OFFICE
OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Alexandria, Virginia; Nicholas
Stephan Altimari, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Richmond,
Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Jermaine Jerrell Sims appeals the district court’s order de-
nying his second motion for reconsideration of the district court’s
denial of his Fed. R. Crim. P. 33 motion for a new trial. Sims
filed an untimely notice of appeal of the district court’s order
denying reconsideration. We dismiss for lack of jurisdiction.
The time periods for filing notices of appeal are governed by
Fed. R. App. P. 4. These periods are "mandatory and jurisdic-
tional." Browder v. Director, Dep't of Corrections,
434 U.S. 257,
264 (1978) (quoting United States v. Robinson,
361 U.S. 220, 229
(1960)). A defendant in a criminal case has ten days from the
entry of a judgment to file a notice of appeal. See Fed. R. App.
P. 4(b)(1). This appeal period may be tolled under the provisions
of Fed. R. App. P. 4 (b)(3) or extended within the thirty days fol-
lowing the expiration of the ten-day appeal period. See Fed. R.
App. P. 4(b)(4).
The district court entered its denial of Sims’ motion on May
25, 2000; Sims’ notice of appeal was filed on June 15, 2000, the
date which he alleged he gave the notice of appeal to prison
officials.* Sims’ failure to note a timely appeal or obtain an ex-
tension of the appeal period leaves this court without jurisdiction
to consider the merits of his appeal. We therefore dismiss this
*
See Houston v. Lack,
487 U.S. 266 (1988).
2
appeal. We also deny Sims’ motion for the production of his trial
transcript at government expense. 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
3