US v. Jason Linder, No. 10-6075 (4th Cir. 2010)

Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-6075 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff Appellee, v. JASON LANDIS LINDER, a/k/a Black, a/k/a Rodney Peterson, Defendant Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Raymond A. Jackson, District Judge. (2:04-cr-00016-RAJ-JEB-5) Submitted: March 25, 2010 Decided: April 2, 2010 Before WILKINSON and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Jason Landis Linder, Appellant Pro Se. Darryl James Mitchell, Assistant United States Attorney, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Jason Landis Linder seeks to appeal the district court s order denying his motion to compel specific performance based on the Government s decision not to file a Fed. R. Crim. P. 35 motion. notice of In criminal cases, the defendant must file the appeal judgment. Fed. within R. App. fourteen P. days 4(b)(1)(A). after With the entry of 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). The district court entered its order on October 8, 2009. The notice of appeal was filed on January 4, 2010. * Because Linder 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 * For the purpose of this appeal, we assume that the date appearing on the notice of appeal is the earliest date it could have been properly delivered to prison officials for mailing to the court. Fed. R. App. P. 4(c); Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266 (1988). We further note that even if we applied the sixty-day civil appeal period as stated in the district court s order, Linder s notice of appeal would still have been untimely. 2
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.