Appeal: 16-4193

Doc: 16

Filed: 04/25/2016

Pg: 1 of 3

Filed: April 25, 2016

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
________________________________
BRIEFING ORDER - CRIMINAL/GRAND JURY
_________________________________
No. 16-4193,

US v. Donald Blankenship
5:14-cr-00244-1

Briefing shall proceed on the following schedule:
Appendix due: 05/31/2016
Opening brief due: 05/31/2016
Response brief due: 06/23/2016
Reply brief permitted within 10 days of service of response brief.
Effective October 1, 2015, the court requires only one paper copy of briefs and
appendices unless the case is to be argued, in which event four paper copies are
required. (Local Rules 30(b)(4) & 31(d)). The notice tentatively assigning a case
for argument requires counsel to file three additional paper copies of their
previously filed briefs and appendices.
The briefs and appendix must conform to the Fourth Circuit Brief & Appendix
Requirements (available as a link from this order and at www.ca4.uscourts.gov).
All parties to a side must join in a single brief, even in consolidated cases, unless
the court has granted a motion for leave to file separate briefs pursuant to Local
Rules 28(a) and 28(d).
Failure to file an opening brief within the scheduled time may lead to imposition of
sanctions against court-appointed counsel or dismissal of the case pursuant to
Local Rule 45 for failure to prosecute; failure to file a response brief will result in
loss of the right to be heard at oral argument. The court discourages motions for
extension of time and grants extensions of the briefing schedule only in
extraordinary circumstances upon a showing of good cause. Local Rule 31(c). If a

 Appeal: 16-4193

Doc: 16

Filed: 04/25/2016

Pg: 2 of 3

brief is filed after its due date, the time for filing subsequent briefs will be
extended by the number of days the brief was late.
Pursuant to Local Rule 34(a), the court may, on its own initiative and without prior
notice, screen an appeal for decision on the parties' briefs without oral argument. If
a case is selected for the oral argument calendar, counsel will receive notice that
the case has been tentatively calendared for a specific court session approximately
two months in advance of the session.
Anders Procedures: If defendant's counsel finds no appealable issue and therefore
intends to file a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), the
following procedures apply:
(1) If the Anders brief is being filed in a consolidated case in which codefendants are not proceeding under Anders, counsel must prepare a separate
opening brief and move to deconsolidate the Anders appeal.
(2) An Anders brief that simply states there are no appealable issues is
insufficient--rather, counsel's opening brief must identify any arguable issues with
appropriate record citations and state, in a brief discussion with case citation, why
such issues lack merit.
(3) Because counsel must review the entire record in an Anders appeal,
counsel must order all transcript in the case, including pre-trial, trial, guilty plea,
and sentencing proceedings. It is not necessary to order arraignments, bail
hearings, voir dire, or opening and closing arguments unless those portions of the
record might support an arguable issue on appeal. Since the court must review the
entire record, an appendix is unnecessary, and copying expenses for an Anders
appendix are not recoverable under the Criminal Justice Act unless the court has
directed the filing of an appendix. The costs for providing transcripts to the
defendant are reimbursable.
(4) Counsel must file a certificate of service of Anders brief on defendant,
stating that the defendant has been provided with a copy of the Anders brief and
advised of his right to file a supplemental pro se brief within 30 days. If the
defendant is not English-speaking, the certificate must also state that the substance
of the Anders brief and the right to file a supplemental pro se brief have been
communicated to the defendant in a language the defendant understands. CJA
counsel must obtain court authorization based upon the estimated costs of
necessary interpreter or translator services before securing such services under the
Criminal Justice Act.

 Appeal: 16-4193

Doc: 16

Filed: 04/25/2016

Pg: 3 of 3

The Anders procedures do not apply to hybrid briefs in which counsel raises
meritorious issues as well as Anders issues, and counsel filing a hybrid brief
should not advise his client that he has a right to file a pro se supplemental brief.
/s/ PATRICIA S. CONNOR, CLERK
By: Amy L. Carlheim, Deputy Clerk