UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 08-7009
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
DARRON OWENS,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Orangeburg. Cameron McGowan Currie, District
Judge. (5:01-cr-00084-CMC)
Submitted: May 15, 2009 Decided: June 11, 2009
Before MICHAEL, TRAXLER, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Darron Owens, Appellant Pro Se. Stacey Denise Haynes, Assistant
United States Attorney, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Darron Owens seeks to appeal the district court’s
order denying his motion for reduction of sentence under 18
U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (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 § 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).
The district court entered its order denying the
motion for reduction of sentence on May 20, 2008. Owens filed
the notice of appeal on June 12, 2008. ∗ Because Owens failed to
file a timely notice of appeal or obtain an extension of the
appeal period, we remanded this case to the district court for
the court to determine whether Owens could demonstrate excusable
neglect or good cause to justify extending the ten-day appeal
∗
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
period. In accordance with our remand order, the district court
received evidence pertaining to the issue and determined that
Owens failed to make the requisite showing.
We have thoroughly reviewed the record and agree that
Owens has failed to demonstrate excusable neglect or good cause
justifying a relaxation of the ten-day appeal period set forth
in Rule 4(b)(1)(A). See generally Bowles v. Russell, 551 U.S.
205, __, 127 S. Ct. 2360, 2363-66 (2007); United States v.
Mitchell, 518 F.3d 740, 750 (10th Cir. 2008). Accordingly, we
dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the
facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the
materials before the court and argument would not aid the
decisional process.
DISMISSED
3