United States v. Errol Baston
This text of United States v. Errol Baston (United States v. Errol Baston) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
USCA4 Appeal: 25-6436 Doc: 6 Filed: 08/01/2025 Pg: 1 of 2
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 25-6436
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
ERROL RAHNELL TAHEIM BASTON,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Greenville. Terrence W. Boyle, District Judge. (4:21-cr-00037-BO-1)
Submitted: July 29, 2025 Decided: August 1, 2025
Before KING, WYNN, and BERNER, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Errol Rahnell Taheim Baston, Appellant Pro Se. David A. Bragdon, Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. USCA4 Appeal: 25-6436 Doc: 6 Filed: 08/01/2025 Pg: 2 of 2
PER CURIAM:
In 2021, Errol Rahnell Taheim Baston pled guilty to possession of a firearm by a
felon, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). The district court sentenced Baston to a total
of 180 months’ imprisonment. Baston appealed the judgment, and we affirmed. United
States v. Baston, No. 21-4690, 2022 WL 4594062 (4th Cir. Sept. 30, 2022).
On May 15, 2025, Baston filed another notice of appeal of the district court’s final
judgment. However, in criminal cases, the defendant must file his notice of appeal within
14 days after the entry of judgment. Fed. R. App. P. 4(b)(1)(A). Because Baston’s notice
of appeal was filed more than three years after entry of the judgment, it is untimely.
Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal. See United States v. Oliver, 878 F.3d 120, 127-129
(4th Cir. 2017) (discussing situations in which this court will sua sponte dismiss untimely
criminal appeals). 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
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
United States v. Errol Baston, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-errol-baston-ca4-2025.