US v. Meblin Figueroa, No. 13-6982 (4th Cir. 2013)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-6982 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. MEBLIN XIOMAR FIGUEROA, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Norman K. Moon, Senior District Judge. (6:05-cr-00024-nkm; 7:07-cv-00329-NKM; 6:11-cv80427-NKM-RSB) Submitted: August 22, 2013 Decided: August 27, 2013 Before MOTZ, DIAZ, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Meblin Xiomar Figueroa, Appellant Pro Se. Donald Ray Wolthuis, Assistant United States Attorney, Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Meblin Xiomar Figueroa seeks to appeal the district court s order construing his Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion as a successive 28 U.S.C.A. ยง 2255 dismissing it on that basis. (West Supp. 2013) motion, and We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the 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 case [T]he is a Bowles v. Russell, 551 U.S. 205, 214 (2007). The district court s order was entered on the docket on March 30, 2012. 2013. * The notice of appeal was filed on June 11, Because Figueroa failed to file a timely notice of appeal or to obtain an extension or reopening of the appeal period, we dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because 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 facts and materials legal before contentions are adequately this and argument court presented would not 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.
