Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca10-16-03062/USCOURTS-ca10-16-03062-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Christopher Holliday
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT

_________________________________

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

 Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

CHRISTOPHER HOLLIDAY, 

 Defendant - Appellant.

No. 16-3062

(D.C. No. 2:12-CR-20141-KHV-9)

(D. Kan.)

_________________________________

ORDER

_________________________________

Before BACHARACH, PHILLIPS, and McHUGH, Circuit Judges.

_________________________________

This matter is before the court on Appellee’s Motion to Dismiss Appeal. In a 

criminal case, a defendant’s notice of appeal must be filed in the district court within 14 

days after entry of the judgment being appealed. Fed. R. App. P. 4(b)(1)(A)(i). The 

timely filing of a notice of appeal by the defendant is an inflexible claim-processing rule 

that may be forfeited if not properly raised by the government. United States v. Garduño, 

506 F.3d 1287, 1290-91 (10th Cir. 2007). 

Appellant proceeding pro se, appeals the judgment entered in his criminal case on 

May 18, 2014. Appellant filed his notice of appeal on March 14, 2016. Although 

Appellant’s notice of appeal was dated May 22, 2014, a notice of appeal is not considered 

filed until received by the district court clerk. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 5(d)(2); Fed. R. App. P. 

25(a)(2). Appellant has not established that he is entitled to the benefit of the prison 

FILED

United States Court of Appeals

Tenth Circuit

April 19, 2016

Elisabeth A. Shumaker

Clerk of Court

Appellate Case: 16-3062 Document: 01019605525 Date Filed: 04/19/2016 Page: 1 
2

mailbox rule. See Fed. R. App. P. 4(c)(1). Appellant asserts that the declaration 

accompanying his notice of appeal complies with 28 U.S.C. § 1746 because it indicates 

the “date of deposit with prison officials, and that postage had been pre-paid.” However, 

Appellant’s declaration on the notice of appeal fails to state that first-class postage was 

prepaid and thus does not satisfy the prison mailbox rule. See United States v. Smith, 182 

F.3d 733, 734 n.1 (10th Cir. 1999) (declining to apply the prison mailbox rule because 

the prisoner’s declaration of timely filing did not state that first-class postage had been 

prepaid). 

Accordingly, Appellee’s Motion to Dismiss Appeal is granted as modified. Under 

the circumstances of this case, dismissal of this appeal as untimely is appropriate. 

Appellant’s notice of appeal, filed nearly twenty-two months after judgment was entered, 

is inordinately late. 

A copy of this order shall stand as and for the mandate of the court.

APPEAL DISMISSED.

Entered for the Court

ELISABETH A. SHUMAKER, Clerk

by: Lindy Lucero Schaible

 Counsel to the Clerk

Appellate Case: 16-3062 Document: 01019605525 Date Filed: 04/19/2016 Page: 2