US v. Myers, No. 07-6569 (4th Cir. 2007)
Annotate this Case
The court issued a subsequent related opinion or order on April 17, 2008.
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 07-6569 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus CLINTON DESHANNON MYERS, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. James C. Turk, Senior District Judge. (7:05-cr-00096-jct) Submitted: August 31, 2007 Decided: September 13, 2007 Before MICHAEL and KING, Circuit Judges, and WILKINS, Senior Circuit Judge. Remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion. Clinton Deshannon Myers, Appellant Pro Se. Ronald Andrew Bassford, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Clinton Deshannon Myers seeks to appeal the district court order denying his motions to reopen the time to file a notice of appeal from his criminal judgment and for production of transcripts. In criminal cases, the defendant must file the notice of appeal within ten days after the entry of either the judgment or the order being appealed. Fed. R. App. P. 4(b)(1)(A)(i). 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 on March 9, 2007. Myers undated notice of appeal was postmarked on April 11, 2007, after the ten-day period excusable neglect period. expired but within the thirty-day Because the notice of appeal was filed within the excusable neglect period, we remand the case to the district court for the court to determine whether Myers has shown excusable neglect or good cause warranting an extension of the tenday appeal period. The record, as supplemented, will then be returned to this court for further consideration. REMANDED - 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.
