US v. Sheridan Glaze, No. 10-6978 (4th Cir. 2010)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-6978 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. SHERIDAN A. GLAZE, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Liam O Grady, District Judge. (1:08-cr-00073-LO-1; 1:09-cv-00097-LO) Submitted: October 13, 2010 Decided: November 12, 2010 Before NIEMEYER and AGEE, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Sheridan A. Glaze, Appellant Pro Se. Edmund P. Power, Assistant United States Attorney, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Sheridan Glaze seeks to appeal the district court s order denying her 28 U.S.C.A. ยง 2255 (West Supp. 2010) motion and requests immediate release from custody pending her appeal. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the notice of appeal was not timely filed and, accordingly, deny Glaze s motion to stay her sentence. 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 s order was entered on the docket on June 11, 2009. The earliest on July 6, 2010. * notice of appeal was filed at the Because Glaze failed to file a timely notice of appeal or to obtain an extension or reopening of the * 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). 2 appeal period, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. Consequently, pending facts we deny appeal. and materials legal before We Glaze s dispense motion with to oral stay argument contentions are adequately the and argument court her sentence because presented would not the in the 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.
