UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 08-7041
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
LAWRENCE LEO HAWKINS, JR.,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Raymond A. Jackson, District
Judge. (2:04-cr-00060-RAJ-TEM-1; 2:07-cv-00287-RAJ)
Submitted: October 21, 2008 Decided: October 28, 2008
Before MICHAEL, TRAXLER, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Lawrence Leo Hawkins, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. William David Muhr,
Assistant United States Attorney, Norfolk, Virginia, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Lawrence Leo Hawkins, Jr., seeks to appeal the
district court’s order denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000)
motion. Parties in a civil action in which the United States is
a party have sixty days following a final order in which to file
a notice of appeal. Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(B). However, the
district court may extend the appeal period if a party moves for
an extension within thirty days of the expiration of the period
under Rule 4(a) and if the party has shown excusable neglect or
good cause warranting an extension. Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5)(A).
“No extension under this Rule 4(a)(5) may exceed 30 days after
the prescribed time or 10 days after the date when the order
granting the motion is entered, whichever is later.” Fed. R.
App. P. 4(a)(5)(C). These time periods are mandatory and
jurisdictional. Browder v. Dir., Dep’t of Corr., 434 U.S. 257,
264 (1978). Expiration of the time limits in Rule 4 deprives
the court of jurisdiction over the case. Hensley v. Chesapeake
& O. Ry. Co., 651 F.2d 226, 228 (4th Cir. 1981); see Fed. R.
App. P. 26(b) (stating that court may not extend appeal period,
except as provided in Rule 4).
The district court entered judgment on March 3, 2008.
Hawkins filed the notice of appeal on May 23, 2008, after the
sixty-day period expired but within the thirty-day excusable
neglect period. Because the notice of appeal was filed within
2
the excusable neglect period, we remand the case to the district
court for the court to determine whether Hawkins has shown
excusable neglect or good cause warranting an extension of the
sixty-day appeal period. The record, as supplemented, will then
be returned to this court for further consideration.
REMANDED
3