United States of America v. Kenneth Ray Matthews

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 20-6110

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

KENNETH RAY MATTHEWS,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at
Norfolk. Raymond A. Jackson, District Judge. (2:16-cr-00061-RAJ-RJK-1; 2:19-cv-
00205-RAJ)

Submitted: May 19, 2020 Decided: May 22, 2020

Before NIEMEYER, HARRIS, and RICHARDSON, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Kenneth Ray Matthews, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

2

PER CURIAM:
Kenneth Ray Matthews seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on
his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2018) motion. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because
the notice of appeal was not timely filed.
When the United States or its officer or agency is a party in a civil case, the notice
of appeal must be filed no more than 60 days after the entry of the district court’s final
judgment or order, Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(B), unless the district court extends the appeal
period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5) or reopens the appeal period under Fed. R. App. P.
4(a)(6). “[T]he timely filing of a notice of appeal in a civil case is a jurisdictional
requirement.” Bowles v. Russell, 551 U.S. 205, 214 (2007).
The district court entered its order on September 23, 2019. Matthews filed the notice
of appeal on January 13, 2020.
*
Because Matthews failed to file a timely notice of appeal
or to obtain an extension or reopening 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 this court and argument would not aid the decisional
process.
DISMISSED

*
For the purpose of this appeal, we assume that the date appearing on the notice of
appeal is the earliest date Matthews could have delivered the notice to prison officials for
mailing to the court. Fed. R. App. P. 4(c)(1); Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266, 276 (1988).