United States v. Slupkowski

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided August 11, 2008·No. 08-6997·Unpublished

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 08-6997

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

STANLEY A. SLUPKOWSKI,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. James C. Cacheris, Senior District Judge. (1:93-cr-00219)

Submitted: July 31, 2008 Decided: August 11, 2008

Before NIEMEYER, TRAXLER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Stanley A. Slupkowski, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM:

Stanley A. Slupkowski seeks to appeal the district

court’s order granting the government’s motion to dismiss the

pending indictment against him. 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). 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 judgment on June 14, 1994.

The notice of appeal was filed on May 20, 2008. Because Slupkowski

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

- 2 -

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

United States v. Slupkowski, (4th Cir. 2008).

United States v. Slupkowski (United States v. Slupkowski) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

United States v. Jose v. Reyes
759 F.2d 351 (Fourth Circuit, 1985)