Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

328 F. App'x 255

United States v. Eckles

U.S. Courts of Appeals

Decided June 25, 2009

This page is marked noindex.

U.S. Courts of Appeals · decided 2009-06-25

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently November 2009

Applies 18 U.S.C. § 3582

Relies on United States v. Reyes · United States of America v. Rogelio Alvarez

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 2009-06-25

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1 Remanded by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

¶2 Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

*256 PER CURIAM:

¶3 Ricky Eckles seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his motion for reduction of sentence under 18 U.S.C. § 3582 (2006). In criminal cases, the defendant must file the notice of appeal within ten days after the entry of judgment. Fed. R.App. P. 4(b)(1)(A); see United States v. Alvarez, 210 F.3d 309, 310 (5th Cir.2000) (holding that § 3582 proceeding is criminal in nature and ten-day appeal period applies). With or without a motion, upon a showing of excusable neglect or good cause, the district court may grant an extension of up to thirty days to file a notice of appeal. Fed. R.App. P. 4(b)(4); United States v. Reyes, 759 F.2d 351, 353 (4th Cir.1985).

¶4 The district court entered its order denying the motion for reduction of sentence on February 27, 2009. Eckles’ notice of appeal was postmarked on March 24, 2009, after the ten-day period expired but within the thirty-day excusable neglect period. Because the notice of appeal was filed within the excusable neglect period, we remand the case to the district court for the court to determine whether Eckles has shown excusable neglect or good cause warranting an extension of the ten-day appeal period. The record, as supplemented, will then be returned to this court for further consideration.

¶5 REMANDED.

/328/fappx/255 · .json · Public domain