Case ID: f-appx_622/html/0451-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM: \n    ", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Arturo HERNANDEZ, Petitioner-Appellant v. William STEPHENS, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division, Respondent-Appellee.
    No. 14-51045
    Summary Calendar.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
    Nov. 10, 2015.
    Arturo Hernandez, Huntsville, TX, pro se.
    Edward Larry Marshall, Office of the Attorney General, Austin, TX, for Respondent-Appellee.
    Before CLEMENT, ELROD, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM:

Arturo Hernandez, Texas prisoner # 1040662, seeks a certificate of appeala-bility (COA) to appeal the time-bar dismissal of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 application, which challenged his conviction of aggravated robbery.

“This Court must examine the basis of its jurisdiction, on its own motion, if necessary.” Mosley v. Cozby, 813 F.2d 659, 660 (5th Cir.1987). A timely notice of appeal is a jurisdictional requirement in a civil case. Bowles v. Russell, 551 U.S. 205, 214, 127 S.Ct. 2360, 168 L.Ed.2d 96 (2007). Hernandez had 30 days, or until September 3, 2014, to file a timely notice of appeal. See Fed, R.App. P. 4(a)(1)(A). He did not file a notice of appeal until after the appeal period expired. He also does not certify that he placed his notice of appeal in the prison mail system “on or before the last day for filing.” See Fed. R.App. P. 25(a)(2)(C). Indeed, his COA itself is dated after the 30-day deadline. Because Hernandez did not file a timely notice of appeal, this appeal is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. See Bowles, 551 U.S. at 214, 127 S.Ct. 2360.

COA DENIED; APPEAL DISMISSED. 
      
       Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.