Willie Gilmore v. Warden Robert Stevenson, Iii

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 15-7598
WILLIE GILMORE,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
WARDEN ROBERT STEVENSON, III,
Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Aiken. Richard M. Gergel, District Judge.
(1:14-cv-04540-RMG)
Submitted: April 19, 2016 Decided: May 18, 2016
Before DIAZ and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Willie Gilmore, Appellant Pro Se. Donald John Zelenka, Senior
Assistant Attorney General, Kaycie Smith Timmons, Assistant
Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 1 of 3 --

2
PER CURIAM:
Willie Gilmore seeks to appeal the district court’s order
accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and
dismissing his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2012).
Parties to a civil action are accorded 30 days after the entry
of the district court’s final judgment or order to note an
appeal. Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(A). However, the district
court may extend the time to file a notice of appeal if a party
moves for an extension of the appeal period within 30 days after
the expiration of the original appeal period and demonstrates
excusable neglect or good cause to warrant an extension. Fed.
R. App. P. 4(a)(5); see Washington v. Bumgarner, 882 F.2d 899,
900-01 (4th Cir. 1989). “[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’s final judgment was entered on the
docket on August 13, 2015. Gilmore’s notice of appeal, dated
September 17, 2015, was filed on Oct. 9, 2015, after the
expiration of the 30-day appeal period but within the excusable
neglect period. With his notice of appeal, Gilmore filed a
motion containing language that we liberally construe as a
request for an extension of time to appeal. Accordingly, we
remand this case to the district court for the limited purpose
of determining whether Gilmore has demonstrated excusable

-- 2 of 3 --

3
neglect or good cause warranting an extension of the 30-day
appeal period. The record, as supplemented, will then be
returned to this court for further consideration.
REMANDED

-- 3 of 3 --