UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 07-6855
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
JACKIE MCKUBBIN, a/k/a Jack,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Richard L. Voorhees,
District Judge. (3:95-cr-00005-3)
Submitted: July 20, 2007 Decided: August 23, 2007
Before MICHAEL and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Jackie McKubbin, Appellant Pro Se. Amy Elizabeth Ray, OFFICE OF
THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Asheville, North Carolina, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Jackie McKubbin seeks to appeal nunc pro tunc his
conviction and life sentence imposed following his guilty plea to
a drug conspiracy and a firearms charge. 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). 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).
The district court entered an amended judgment on
September 15, 1999. The notice of appeal was filed on May 31,
2007.* Because McKubbin failed to file a timely notice of appeal
or to obtain an extension of the appeal period, we dismiss the
appeal for lack of jurisdiction. We deny McKubbin’s motions to
rescind the informal briefing order, for appointment of counsel,
and for reconsideration of the order deferring action on the motion
for appointment of counsel. We dispense with oral argument because
the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in 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 -
materials before the court and argument would not aid the
decisional process.
DISMISSED
- 3 -