Donte Caudle v. Nash County Jail, No. 22-6812 (4th Cir. 2022)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 22-6812 DONTE CAUDLE, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. NASH COUNTY JAIL, Defendant - Appellee. No. 22-6813 DONTE CAUDLE, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. KEISHA LONG, Nurse, and Defendant – Appellee, DR. A. ANDERSON; SHERIFF WEST TRIPP, Defendants. No. 22-6814 DONTE CAUDLE, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. SHERIFF WEST TRIPP, Defendant - Appellee. Appeals from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Dever III, District Judge; Louise W. Flanagan, District Judge. (5:20ct-03003-D; 5:17-ct-03280-FL; 5:18-ct-03030-FL) Submitted: December 15, 2022 Decided: December 20, 2022 Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and WILKINSON and DIAZ, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Donte Caudle, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 2 PER CURIAM: Donte Caudle filed a single notice of appeal, listing three different district court proceedings in which he wishes to appeal. Caudle’s notice of appeal does not identify any specific district court orders from which he intends to appeal. However, in each of the three district court proceedings, the most recent order or judgment was entered on the district court docket no later than June 2020. Accordingly, we dismiss all three appeals for lack of jurisdiction because the notice of appeal was not timely filed. In civil cases, parties have 30 days after the entry of the district court’s final judgment or order to note an appeal, Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(A), 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). “[T]he timely filing of a notice of appeal in a civil case is a jurisdictional requirement.” Bowles v. Russell, 551 U.S. 205, 214 (2007). The most recent orders in these district court proceedings were entered no later than June 2020. Caudle filed the notice of appeal on June 22, 2022. * Because Caudle failed to file a timely notice of appeal or to obtain an extension or reopening of the appeal period, we dismiss the consolidated appeals. For the purpose of this appeal, we assume that the postmark date appearing on the envelope containing the notice of appeal is the earliest date Caudle could have delivered the notice to prison officials for mailing to the court. Fed. R. App. P. 4(c)(1); Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266, 276 (1988). * 3 We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process. DISMISSED 4
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.
