United States v. Akinkoye

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,  Plaintiff-Appellee, v.  No. 01-6438 AKIN AKINKOYE, Defendant-Appellant.  Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Peter J. Messitte, District Judge. (CR-97-151-PJM) Submitted: July 26, 2001 Decided: August 3, 2001 Before WILKINS, LUTTIG, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion. COUNSEL Akin Akinkoye, Appellant Pro Se. Steven Michael Dettelbach, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Greenbelt, Mary- land, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). 2 UNITED STATES v. AKINKOYE OPINION PER CURIAM Akinbobola Akinkoye seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his motion to compel counsel to produce pretrial discovery and trial motions. The district court entered an order denying Akinkoye’s motion on October 5, 2000. However, Akinkoye did not file a notice of appeal until March 6, 2001, in which he indicated that he did not receive notice of the order to be appealed until that day. Where, as here, a pro se appellant files an untimely notice of appeal offering some excuse for its untimeliness, that notice is properly con- strued as a motion to reopen the time to note an appeal under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(6). See United States v. Fuever, 236 F.3d 725, 729 n.7 (D.C. Cir. 2001). Accordingly, we remand the case to the district court for the court to determine whether Akinkoye can satisfy the requirements of Rule 4(a)(6). See Ogden v. San Juan Cnty., 32 F.3d 452, 454 (10th Cir. 1994). The record, as supplemented, will then be returned to this court for further consideration. REMANDED