US v. Kevin Buckmon, No. 09-4895 (4th Cir. 2010)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-4895 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff Appellee, v. KEVIN JEROME BUCKMON, Defendant Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Aiken. Margaret B. Seymour, District Judge. (1:07-cr-00678-MBS-1) Submitted: October 28, 2010 Decided: November 16, 2010 Before WILKINSON, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Beattie B. Ashmore, BEATTIE B. ASHMORE, P.A., Greenville, South Carolina, for Appellant. John David Rowell, Assistant United States Attorney, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Kevin Jerome Buckmon seeks to appeal his conviction and sentence. notice of In criminal cases, the defendant must file the appeal judgment. 1 Fed. within R. App. fourteen days after P. 4(b)(1)(A). the With or entry of 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 judgment on February 11, 2009. The notice of appeal was filed on September 21, 2009. 2 Because Buckmon failed to file a timely notice of appeal or to obtain an extension of the appeal period, 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 1 When the judgment was entered, the period was ten days. Buckmon s notice of appeal was untimely under either period. 2 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
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
