United States of America v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266 1988 . - 2 - PER CURIAM: Vincent B. Best seeks to appeal the…

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 07-6334
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
VINCENT B. BEST,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Graham C. Mullen, Senior
District Judge. (3:93-cr-00216-3)
Submitted: June 15, 2007 Decided: June 22, 2007
Before WIDENER, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Vincent B. Best, 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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 1 of 3 --

*See Fed. R. App. P. 4(c); Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266
(1988).
- 2 -
PER CURIAM:
Vincent B. Best seeks to appeal the district court’s
order denying his “petition for clarification determination” of the
court’s prior order denying in part and granting in part his motion
for reduction of sentence under 18 U.S.C.A. § 3582 (West 2000 &
Supp. 2007). 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 that § 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 Best’s
petition for clarification on August 17, 2006. The notice of
appeal was filed on February 9, 2006. * Because Best 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

-- 2 of 3 --

- 3 -
the materials before the court and argument would not aid the
decisional process.
DISMISSED

-- 3 of 3 --