SYLVESTER TRIBBITT, PETITIONER-APPELLANT,
v.
LOUIE L. WAINWRIGHT ET AL., RESPONDENT-APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court held that the appeal must be dismissed for want of jurisdiction because the notice of appeal was untimely filed.
Appellant sought to appeal the district court's denial of habeas corpus relief. His initial motion to the appellate court was filed 37 days after the …
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Certificate Of Probable Cause cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM:
This appeal follows the district court’s denial of habeas corpus relief to appel lant, a prisoner of the State of Florida. The appeal must be dismissed for want of jurisdiction.
The district court entered its order denying appellant’s petition for habeas corpus on October 12, 1971. The first indication given by appellant that he desired to appeal was a motion for certificate of probable cause filed in this Court on January 17, 1972, which was returned to appellant with the advice to present it to the court below. Thereafter, on February 4, 1972, appellant filed his motion for certificate of probable cause and leave to appeal in forma pau-peris in the district court.
Rule 4(a), Fed.R.App.P., requires that notice of appeal be filed within 30 days from the date of entry of judgment or order sought to be appealed. This time period may be extended an additional 30 days upon a showing of excusable neglect. Jackson v. Decker, 5th Cir. 1971, 451 F. 2d 348; Dunn v. Henderson, 5th Cir. 1971, 446 F. 2d 1398; Gann v. Smith, 5 Cir. 1971, 443 F. 2d 352; Bean v. Wainwright, 5th Cir. 1971, 437 F. 2d 112. Even construing appellant’s motion addressed to this Court as a notice of appeal, it is clear that it was not presented until 37 days after the 60-day maximum period had elapsed. The motions in the district court were not presented until 55 days beyond such period.
Appellant stated in his motion before the district court that he was prevented from filing a notice of appeal through the actions of prison authorities. Assuming that this fact, if established, would support allowing appellant’s belated appeal pursuant to Fallen v. United States, 378 U.S. 139, 84 S.Ct. 1689, 12 L.Ed.2d 760 (1964), appellant’s bald allegation, in the absence of evidence before or findings by the district court, cannot create jurisdiction in the instant case.
Since the record clearly shows the appellant filed nothing that could be construed as a notice of appeal until some 37 days beyond the maximum extended time period set forth in Rule 4(a) and has neither presented nor alleged any facts tending to show he was prevented from doing so by the actions of prison authorities, this Court has no jurisdiction to entertain his appeal.
Dismissed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
NeSMITH v. Fulton, 615 F.2d 196 (5th Cir. 1980)
-
Martin v. Wainwright, 469 F.2d 1072 (5th Cir. 1972)
-
Louella S. Da'Ville v. Wise, 470 F.2d 1364 (5th Cir. 1973)
Previewing 3 of 7 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Isbell Enters., Inc. v. Citizens Cas. Co. OF NEW York, 431 F.2d 409 (5th Cir. 1970)
- Fallen v. United States, 378 U.S. 139 (U.S. 1964)
- Gann v. Smith, 443 F.2d 352 (5th Cir. 1971)
- Hardy Jackson v. Sheriff Bill Decker, 451 F.2d 348 (5th Cir. 1971)
- Dunn v. Henderson, 446 F.2d 1398 (5th Cir. 1971)
- Bean v. Louie L. Wainwright, 437 F.2d 112 (5th Cir. 1971)