US v. Charles Keitt, No. 10-6143 (4th Cir. 2010)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-6143 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff Appellee, v. CHARLES JERMAINE KEITT, Defendant Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Orangeburg. Margaret B. Seymour, District Judge. (5:07-cr-01020-MBS-1) Submitted: June 1, 2010 Decided: June 10, 2010 Before GREGORY, SHEDD, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Charles Jermaine Keitt, Appellant Pro Se. Ragsdale, Assistant United States Attorney, Carolina, for Appellee. Stanley Columbia, Duane South Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Charles Jermaine Keitt appeals the district order denying his Fed. R. Crim. P. 36 motion. the record Keith, and No. find no reversible 5:07-cr-01020-MBS-1 We have reviewed error. United (D.S.C. court s Jan. States 11, v. 2010). Additionally, Keitt seeks to appeal the district court s order denying relief on his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2006) motion. Keitt s notice of appeal as to the denial of his § 3582(c)(2) motion was untimely; however, the Government has not sought to invoke Fed. R. App. P. 4(b) against Keitt. Therefore, we may consider the district court s order denying Keitt s § 3582(c)(2) motion. 2008); United States v. Mitchell, 518 F.3d 740, 744 (10th Cir. see (noting Bowles that jurisdictional; v. Russell, periods appeal 551 in rather, they U.S. 205, criminal are 208-13 cases (2007) are claim-processing not rules adopted by the Supreme Court that do not affect this court s subject-matter jurisdiction). find no reversible error. We have reviewed the record and Accordingly, reasons stated by the district court. we affirm for the United States v. Keith, No. 5:07-cr-01020-MBS-1 (D.S.C. May 8, 2010). We dispense with oral contentions argument adequately because presented in the the facts and materials legal before the court are and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED 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.