Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca10-15-03157/USCOURTS-ca10-15-03157-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Israel Santamaria-Rodriguez
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT

_________________________________

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

 Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

ISRAEL SANTAMARIA-RODRIGUEZ, 

 Defendant - Appellant.

No. 15-3157

(D.C. No. 6:14-CR-10117-EFM-1)

(D. Kan.)

_________________________________

ORDER

_________________________________

Before BACHARACH, PHILLIPS, and McHUGH, Circuit Judges.

_________________________________

This matter is before us on the government’s Motion to Dismiss Appeal. The 

government seeks to dismiss this direct criminal appeal on timeliness grounds. The 

notice of appeal was filed pro se by the defendant, Israel Santamaria-Rodriguez. Mr. 

Santamaria-Rodriguez, represented by counsel, previously appealed the final judgment, 

but he voluntarily dismissed that appeal on December 22, 2014. Mr. SantamariaRodriguez has not filed a response to the government’s motion to dismiss this appeal.

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

days after entry of the judgment. Fed. R. App. P. 4(b)(1). Although the district court 

may grant an extension of time for filing the notice of appeal, this extension may not 

exceed 30 days from the original deadline for filing the notice of appeal. See Fed. R. 

App. P. 4(b)(4). 

FILED

United States Court of Appeals

Tenth Circuit

August 4, 2015

Elisabeth A. Shumaker

Clerk of Court

Appellate Case: 15-3157 Document: 01019470428 Date Filed: 08/04/2015 Page: 1 
2

In the instant case, the district court entered judgment against Mr. SantamariaRodriguez on November 26, 2014, making the notice of appeal due no later than 

December 10, 2014. Even if the district court had granted the maximum extension of 

time allowed under the rules, the time for filing the notice of appeal would have expired 

January 9, 2015. Mr. Santamaria-Rodriguez filed his pro se notice of appeal on July 6, 

2015, well beyond the deadline for filing an appeal.

The timely filing of a notice of appeal by the defendant in a criminal case 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). If 

properly raised, however, we must grant relief. United States v. Mitchell, 518 F.3d 740, 

744 (10th Cir 2008) (citing Garduño, 506 F.3d at 1290-91). Because the government has 

properly invoked the time bar in Rule 4(b), and we agree that the pro se notice of appeal 

was untimely, the government’s motion to dismiss this appeal is granted. 

APPEAL DISMISSED. All pending motions are denied as moot.

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

Entered for the Court

ELISABETH A. SHUMAKER, Clerk

by: Jane K. Castro

 Counsel to the Clerk

Appellate Case: 15-3157 Document: 01019470428 Date Filed: 08/04/2015 Page: 2