United States of America v. Jamar Ke-Shawn Parker

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 23-6741
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
JAMAR KE-SHAWN PARKER,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at
Wilmington. James C. Dever III, District Judge. (7:18-cr-00117-D-1; 7:21-cv-00212-D)
Submitted: May 30, 2024 Decided: June 3, 2024
Before GREGORY and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and MOTZ, Senior Circuit Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Jamar Ke-Shawn Parker, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 1 of 2 --

2
PER CURIAM:
Jamar Ke-Shawn Parker seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on
his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 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 judgment on September 8, 2022, and the appeal period
expired on November 7, 2022. Parker filed the notice of appeal on July 18, 2023.* Because
Parker 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 postmark date appearing on the
envelope containing the notice of appeal is the earliest date Parker 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).

-- 2 of 2 --