Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_06-cv-00528/USCOURTS-azd-2_06-cv-00528-5/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 530
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Habeas Corpus
Cause of Action: 28:2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Robert F. Lindley, Jr., 

Plaintiff, 

vs.

Dora B. Schriro, et. al., 

Defendants. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. 06-0528-PHX-DGC

ORDER

On August 10, 2007, the Court denied Petitioner Robert Lindley’s habeas corpus

petition. Dkt. #33. On the same day, the Clerk entered judgment. Dkt. # 34. Petitioner has

now filed a Motion to Stay Habeas Corpus Proceedings. Dkt. #35. Petitioner asks the Court

to stay his case so that he can “reserve the right to file a ‘motion for reconsideration’ or move

forward in this [case] to appeal to the 9th Circuit court once certain matters are rectified[.]”

Dkt. #35 at 2. 

Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 4 states that a notice of appeal must be filed with

the district clerk within 30 days after entry of the judgment or order appealed. Fed. R. App.

P. 4(a)(1)(A). As noted above, judgment was entered in this case on August 10, 2007,

triggering the 30-day period for Petitioner to file a notice of appeal. Certain post-judgment

motions have the effect of tolling the 30-day appeal period: (1) motion for judgment under

Rule 50(b), (2) motion to amend or make additional factual findings under Rule 52(b), (3)

motion for attorney’s fees under Rule 54 if the district court extends the time to appeal under

Rule 58, (4) motion to alter or amend the judgment under Rule 59, (5) motion for a new trial

Case 2:06-cv-00528-DGC Document 36 Filed 08/24/07 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

- 2 -

under Rule 59, (6) motion for relief under Rule 60 if the motion is filed no later than 10 days

after the judgment is entered. Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(4)(i)-(vi). 

Petitioner’s motion to stay is not a motion that tolls the 30-day appeal period. The

Court therefore will not stay the proceedings indefinitely as Petitioner requests. The rules

do, however, permit the Court to extend Petitioner’s time to file an appeal for 30 additional

days provided Petitioner files a motion with the Court and shows excusable neglect or good

cause. Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5)(A)-(C). 

The Court will construe Petitioner’s motion to stay as a motion for extension of time

to file an appeal. The Court finds that Petitioner has shown good cause for an extension due

to his lack of facility with the legal process and the complexity of his habeas corpus petition.

The Court will therefore grant a 30-day extension for Petitioner to file a notice of appeal.

Petitioner should note that the Court lacks authority to grant further extensions. Fed.

R. App. P. 4(a)(5)(C). Petitioner should refer to Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure 3 and

4 for further instructions on filing a notice of appeal.

IT IS ORDERED:

1. Petitioner’s Motion to Stay (Dkt. #35) is granted to the extent it is construed

as a motion for extension of time to file a notice of appeal, but is denied to the

extent it seeks an indefinite stay of this case..

2. The Court will grant Petitioner an extension of 30 days to file a notice of

appeal. The notice of appeal must be filed by October 9, 2007.

DATED this 24th day of August, 2007.

Case 2:06-cv-00528-DGC Document 36 Filed 08/24/07 Page 2 of 2