US v. Curtis Robinson, No. 14-6647 (4th Cir. 2014)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 14-6647 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. CURTIS JEFFREY ROBINSON, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. W. Earl Britt, Senior District Judge. (5:11-cr-00357-BR-2; 5:13-cv-00673-BR) Submitted: July 24, 2014 Before FLOYD and Circuit Judge. THACKER, Decided: Circuit Judges, and July 29, 2014 DAVIS, Senior Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Curtis Jeffrey Robinson, Appellant Pro Se. Parker, Ethan A. Ontjes, Assistant United Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. Jennifer P. MayStates Attorneys, Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Curtis Jeffrey Robinson seeks to appeal the district court s orders denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion and his motion for reconsideration. of jurisdiction because the We dismiss the appeal for lack notice of appeal was not timely filed. When the United States or its officer or agency is a party, the notice of appeal must be filed no more than sixty days after the entry of the district court s final judgment or order, Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(B), unless the district court extends the appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5), or reopens the appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(6). timely filing of a notice jurisdictional requirement. of appeal in a civil [T]he case is a Bowles v. Russell, 551 U.S. 205, 214 (2007). The district court entered the Robinson s § 2255 motion on October 9, 2013. order denying Robinson timely filed a motion for reconsideration, staying the appeal period until the court s denial of that motion on November 14, 2013. See Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(4)(A); Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e). notice of appeal was filed on April 22, 2014. * * The Because Robinson For the purpose of this appeal, we assume that the date appearing on the envelope in which Robinson filed his notice of appeal is the earliest date it could have been properly (Continued) 2 failed to extension appeal. legal before file or a timely reopening of notice the of appeal appeal or period, to we obtain dismiss an the We dispense with oral argument because the facts and contentions this court are adequately and argument presented would not in aid the the materials decisional process. DISMISSED delivered to prison officials for mailing to the court. App. P. 4(c); Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266 (1988). 3 Fed. R.
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.
