Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca10-15-06184/USCOURTS-ca10-15-06184-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Fidencio Castillo-Delgado
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT

_________________________________

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

 Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

FIDENCIO CASTILLO-DELGADO, 

 Defendant - Appellant.

No. 15-6184

(D.C. No. 5:11-CR-00233-HE-1)

(W.D. Okla.)

_________________________________

ORDER

_________________________________

Before BRISCOE, MATHESON, and MORITZ, Circuit Judges.

_________________________________

Defendant Fidencio Castillo-Delgado appeals the district court’s July 6, 2015 

order granting in part his motion to reduce his prison sentence under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c). 

The government filed a motion to dismiss the appeal because the notice of appeal was not 

filed timely. The appellant filed a response opposing the government’s motion. Upon 

consideration, the government’s motion is granted, and this appeal is dismissed.

A notice of appeal in a criminal case must be filed within 14 days after entry of the 

judgment. Fed. R. App. P. 4(b)(1)(A)(i). The timeliness requirement of Rule 4(b) is an 

inflexible claim processing rule. United States v. Garduño, 506 F.3d 1287, 1290-91 (10th 

Cir. 2007). The time limitation in Rule 4(b) applies to appeals of orders disposing of 

motions filed pursuant to § 3582(c). United States v. Randall, 666 F.3d 1238, 1240 (10th 

Cir. 2011). 

FILED

United States Court of Appeals

Tenth Circuit

November 3, 2015

Elisabeth A. Shumaker

Clerk of Court

Appellate Case: 15-6184 Document: 01019517440 Date Filed: 11/03/2015 Page: 1 
2

In this case, the district court’s order was entered on the district court docket on 

July 6, 2015. The notice of appeal should have been filed on or before July 20, 2015. The 

notice of appeal was filed on September 21, 2015, two months after the deadline expired.

The government argued correctly in its motion to dismiss the appeal that the notice 

of appeal was untimely filed. The appellant’s response opposing the motion is 

unpersuasive. The appellant asks this court to extend the time to appeal in the “interest of 

justice,” but only the district court has authority to grant relief from an untimely notice of 

appeal. Fed. R. App. P. 4(b)(4). The appellant never asked the district court for relief, and 

the time within which he could have sought relief has also expired. Accordingly, the 

government’s motion to dismiss this appeal is granted. United States v. Mitchell, 518 

F.3d 740, 744 (10th Cir. 2008) (“[T]he time bar in Rule 4(b) must be enforced by this 

court when properly invoked by the government.” (citing Garduño, 506 F.3d at 1290-

91)).

APPEAL DISMISSED.

Entered for the Court

ELISABETH A. SHUMAKER, Clerk

by: Lara Smith

 Counsel to the Clerk

Appellate Case: 15-6184 Document: 01019517440 Date Filed: 11/03/2015 Page: 2