Filed: Dec. 01, 2004
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-6803 ROBERT HOLLAND KOON, Petitioner - Appellant, versus CHARLES M. CONDON, South Carolina Attorney General, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Beaufort. C. Weston Houck, Senior District Judge. (CA-01-3101-9-12) Submitted: November 3, 2004 Decided: December 1, 2004 Before WILKINSON, MICHAEL, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Remanded by unpublished per curia
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-6803 ROBERT HOLLAND KOON, Petitioner - Appellant, versus CHARLES M. CONDON, South Carolina Attorney General, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Beaufort. C. Weston Houck, Senior District Judge. (CA-01-3101-9-12) Submitted: November 3, 2004 Decided: December 1, 2004 Before WILKINSON, MICHAEL, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Remanded by unpublished per curiam..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 04-6803
ROBERT HOLLAND KOON,
Petitioner - Appellant,
versus
CHARLES M. CONDON, South Carolina Attorney
General,
Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Beaufort. C. Weston Houck, Senior District
Judge. (CA-01-3101-9-12)
Submitted: November 3, 2004 Decided: December 1, 2004
Before WILKINSON, MICHAEL, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Robert Holland Koon, Appellant Pro Se. Donald John Zelenka, Chief
Deputy Attorney General, William Edgar Salter, III, OFFICE OF THE
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF SOUTH CAROLINA, Columbia, South Carolina, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Robert Holland Koon seeks to appeal the district court’s
order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254
(2000). The notice of appeal was received approximately eight days
after the expiration of the appeal period. Under Fed. R. App. P.
4(c)(1) and Houston v. Lack,
487 U.S. 266 (1988), the notice is
considered filed as of the date Koon properly delivered it to
prison officials for mailing to the court. The record does not
reveal if or when Koon complied with the requirements of Fed. R.
App. P. 4(c)(1). Accordingly, we remand the case for the district
court to obtain this information from the parties and to determine
whether the filing was timely under Fed. R. App. P. 4(c)(1) and
Houston v. Lack. The record, as supplemented, will then be
returned to this court for further consideration.
REMANDED
- 2 -