Millanyo Woody v. Tucker, No. 21-6088 (4th Cir. 2021)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 21-6088 MILLANYO WOODY, Petitioner - Appellant, v. TUCKER, Warden, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Charleston. Sherri A. Lydon, District Judge. (2:19-cv-00785-SAL) Submitted: April 22, 2021 Decided: April 27, 2021 Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, AGEE, Circuit Judge, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge. Remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion. Millanyo Woody, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Millanyo Woody seeks to appeal the district court’s June 19, 2020, order denying relief on Woody’s 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition but granting a certificate of appealability on one of his ineffective assistance of counsel claims. On October 6, 2020, Woody moved for an extension of time to reopen the appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(6). The district court did not rule on this motion and, on December 20, 2020, * Woody noted an appeal. We remand the case for the limited purpose of allowing the district court to rule on Woody’s Rule 4(a)(6) motion to reopen the appeal period. The record, as supplemented, will then be returned to this court for further consideration. REMANDED For the purpose of this appeal, we assume that the date appearing on the notice of appeal is the earliest date Woody could have delivered the notice to prison officials for mailing. Fed. R. App. P. 4(c)(1); Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266, 276 (1988). * 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.