Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca10-19-07058/USCOURTS-ca10-19-07058-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 530
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Habeas Corpus
Cause of Action: 

---

FILED

United States Court of Appeals

Tenth Circuit

February 21, 2020

Christopher M. Wolpert

Clerk of Court

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT

_________________________________

LAWRENCE BREEDLOVE, 

 Petitioner - Appellant,

v.

JEORLD BRAGGS, JR., 

 Respondent - Appellee.

No. 19-7058

(D.C. No. 6:16-CV-00356-JHP-KEW)

(E.D. Okla.)

_________________________________

ORDER

_________________________________

Before MATHESON, McHUGH, and CARSON, Circuit Judges.

_________________________________

Plaintiff Lawrence Breedlove, a state prisoner, appealed the district court’s order 

and final judgment dismissing his habeas corpus petition filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 

§ 2241. The clerk entered an order to show cause as to why the appeal should not be 

dismissed as untimely filed. Mr. Breedlove filed in the district court a motion seeking 

relief from the untimely appeal, but the district court declined to provide relief. Upon 

consideration, we have concluded that we are without jurisdiction to consider Mr. 

Breedlove’s appeal.

Taking an appeal within the prescribed time is required to convey jurisdiction to 

this court. Bowles v. Russell, 551 U.S. 205, 209 (2007). This court has no authority to 

Appellate Case: 19-7058 Document: 010110307103 Date Filed: 02/21/2020 Page: 1
2

make equitable exceptions to jurisdictional requirements. Id. at 216. Although Mr. 

Breedlove is proceeding pro se, he must comply with the same procedural requirements 

as all other litigants. Kay v. Bemis, 500 F.3d 1214, 1218 (10th Cir. 2007). 

In this case, the district court’s order dismissing Mr. Breedlove’s § 2241 petition 

and final judgment were entered on September 16, 2019. A timely notice of appeal had to 

be filed by October 16, 2019. See Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(A) (notice of appeal in civil 

case must be filed within 30 days after entry of judgment); Jenkins v. Burtzloff, 69 F.3d 

460, 462 (10th Cir. 1995) (time to appeal runs from entry of judgment on district court 

docket, not date it was received by pro se prisoner litigant). The notice of appeal was not 

filed until October 28, 2019, 12 days after the filing deadline expired. Mr. Breedlove filed 

a motion to reconsider the dismissal of his case, but that motion was not filed within the 

time required to toll the time to appeal from the final judgment. See id.

4(a)(1)(A)(iv)&(v); 4(a)(1)(B)(i).

Mr. Breedlove’s only potential remedy was to ask the district court to excuse his 

untimely filing, which he did. See, e.g., 28 U.S.C. § 2107(c); Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5) & 

(a)(6). The district court denied Mr. Breedlove’s request. Mr. Breedlove’s untimely 

notice of appeal is therefore unexcused. His memorandum brief and other documents 

filed in response to orders issued by this court do not present any legal authority that 

would allow this court to consider his late appeal. In short, “[t]he time limit has run and 

we are without jurisdiction under the facts of this case.” Jenkins, 69 F.3d at 464.

Appellate Case: 19-7058 Document: 010110307103 Date Filed: 02/21/2020 Page: 2
3

APPEAL DISMISSED.

Entered for the Court

CHRISTOPHER M. WOLPERT, Clerk

by: Lara Smith

 Counsel to the Clerk

Appellate Case: 19-7058 Document: 010110307103 Date Filed: 02/21/2020 Page: 3