US v. Kevin Shelton, No. 08-8048 (4th Cir. 2009)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-8048 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. KEVIN RODNEY SHELTON, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Rebecca Beach Smith, District Judge. (2:05-cr-00079-WDK-JEB-1) Submitted: February 26, 2009 Decided: March 6, 2009 Before NIEMEYER, MICHAEL, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Kevin Rodney Shelton, Appellant Pro Se. Sherrie Scott Capotosto, Assistant United States Attorney, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Kevin Rodney Shelton seeks to appeal the district court s order denying his motion for reduction of sentence under 18 U.S.C. § 3582 (2006). In criminal cases, the defendant must file the notice of appeal within ten days after the entry of Fed. R. App. P. 4(b)(1)(A); see United States v. judgment. Alvarez, 210 F.3d 309, 310 (5th Cir. 2000) (holding that § 3582 proceeding applies). is criminal in nature and ten-day appeal period 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 its order denying Shelton s motion for reduction of sentence on July 11, 2008. of appeal was filed on September 9, 2008. * failed to file a timely notice * of appeal The notice Because Shelton or to obtain an For the purpose of this appeal, we assume the date appearing on the envelope containing the notice of appeal is the earliest date it could have been properly delivered to prison officials for mailing to the court. See Fed. R. App. P. 4(c); The certificate of Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266 (1988). service did not contain a proper date that was attested to by a declaration under penalty of perjury or a notarized statement, and the evidence of the date of mailing and receipt by the district court suggests a more accurate date of delivery to the prison mailbox. See Fed. R. App. P. 4(c)(1); 28 U.S.C. § 1746 (2006). 2 extension of dispense with the appeal oral period, argument we dismiss because the the facts appeal. and We legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. DISMISSED 3
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.
