Tawoine Banks v. M. King

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 25-6283

TAWOINE BANKS,

Petitioner - Appellant,

v.

WARDEN M. L. KING,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at
Raleigh. Richard E. Myers, II, Chief District Judge. (5:22-hc-02164-M-RJ)

Submitted: July 27, 2026 Decided: August 10, 2026

Before KING and HEYTENS, Circuit Judges, and KEENAN, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed in part and dismissed in part by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Tawoine Aquil Frank Banks, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

2

PER CURIAM:
Tawoine Aquil Frank Banks, a federal prisoner, appeals the district court’s orders
denying his petition for relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 and motions to reconsider. The
district court’s November 28, 2023, order denying relief on his § 2241 petition is not
properly before this court because Banks’s notice of appeal, filed in April 2025, was not
timely as to that order. See Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(B) (providing a 60-day period to appeal
a final order where the United States is a party); Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(4)(A) (providing that
timely motion under Rule 59(e) or Rule 60(b) motion filed within the time for filing a Rule
59(e) motion extends the period to appeal a final judgment). Thus, we dismiss the appeal
as to the denial of Banks’s § 2241 petition.
As to the denial of reconsideration, we have reviewed the record and find no
reversible error. See Bonnie v. Dunbar, 157 F.4th 610 (4th Cir. 2025), petition for cert.
filed, No. 25-1363 (U.S. June 9, 2026). Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s denial
of reconsideration. Banks v. King, No. 5:22-hc-02164-M-RJ (E.D.N.C. Mar. 24, 2025).
We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately
presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional
process.
AFFIRMED IN PART,
DISMISSED IN PART