US v. Vengoechea, No. 06-7540 (4th Cir. 2006)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-7540 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus REGINA VENGOECHEA, Vengoechea, a/k/a Regina Lopez De Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville. Margaret B. Seymour, District Judge. (6:99-cr-00098-MBS) Submitted: December 14, 2006 Decided: December 21, 2006 Before MICHAEL, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Regina Vengoechea, Appellant Pro Se. Arthur Bradley Parham, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Florence, South Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Regina Vengoechea seeks to appeal her conviction and sentence. In criminal cases, the defendant must file the notice of appeal within ten days after the entry of judgment. P. 4(b)(1)(A). Fed. R. App. With or without a motion, upon a showing of excusable neglect or good cause, the district court may grant an extension of up to thirty days to file a notice of appeal. Fed. R. App. P. 4(b)(4); United States v. Reyes, 759 F.2d 351, 353 (4th Cir. 1985). The district court entered judgment on June 27, 2000. The notice of appeal was filed on August 30, 2006.* Because Vengoechea failed to file a timely notice of appeal or to obtain an extension 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 the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. DISMISSED * Vengoechea filed a Certificate of Appealability that the district court docketed as a notice of appeal. We have given Vengoechea the benefit of Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266 (1988), and Fed. R. App. P. 4(c), in calculating when her notice of appeal was filed. - 2 -

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.