Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca10-91-06074/USCOURTS-ca10-91-06074-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Attorney General
Appellee
Jack Cowley
Appellee
Ronald Gene Smith
Appellant

Document Text:

I ., 

FILED 

United States Coμrt (?f Appcnls 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Tent!t Circuit 

TENTH CIRCUIT 

RONALD GENE SMITH, ) 

) 

Petitioner-Appellant, ) 

) 

V • ) 

) 

JACK COWLEY; ATTORNEY GENERAL,) 

) 

Respondents-Appellees. ) 

AUG 2 2 1991 

ROBERT L. HOECKER 

Clerk 

No. 91-6074 

(D.C. No. CIV-90-1501-B) 

(W.D. Okla.) 

ORDER AND JUDGMENT* 

Before ANDERSON, TACHA, and BRORBY, Circuit Judges. 

After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel 

has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially 

assist the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 

34(a); 10th Cir. R. 34.1.9. The case is therefore ordered 

submitted without oral argument. 

Petitioner-appellant Ronald Gene Smith appeals the district 

court's refusal to grant his request to file an appeal out of 

time. The district court denied Smith's petition for writ of 

habeas corpus on November 30, 1990. In a letter received by the 

district court on February 1, 1991, Smith claims he mistakenly 

transmitted "briefs" to this court rather than filing the notice 

of appeal as required by Rule 4(a) of the Federal Rules of 

Appellate Procedure. 

* This order and judgment has no precedential value and shall 

not be cited, or used by any court within the Tenth Circuit, 

except for purposes of establishing the doctrines of the law of 

the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. 10th Cir. R. 

36.3. 

Appellate Case: 91-6074 Document: 010110132147 Date Filed: 08/22/1991 Page: 1 
I.• 

Rule 4(a) requires a notice of appeal be filed with the clerk 

of the district court within thirty days after the date of the 

entry of the judgment from which the appeal is taken. The rule 

further provides: 

[T]he district court, upon a showing of excusable 

neglect or good cause, may extend the time for 

filing a notice of appeal upon motion filed not 

later than 30 days after the expiration of the time 

prescribed by this Rule 4(a) No such 

extension shall exceed 30 days past such prescribed 

time or 10 days from the date of entry of the order 

granting the motion, whichever occurs later. 

Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5). 

The requirement of a timely notice of appeal is mandatory and 

jurisdictional. Browder Y..!.. Director, Dep't of Corrections, 434 

U.S. 257, 264 (1978). In Certain Underwriters at Lloyds of London 

Y..!.. Evans, 896 F.2d 1255 (10th Cir. 1990), we noted that "neither 

the district court nor this court has the authority to enlarge the 

time for filing notice of appeal beyond the time limits contained 

in the appellate rules." Id. at 1256. Smith neither filed the 

required notice of appeal or his motion for enlargement of time 

within the appropriate time period. His letter to the district 

court is dated January 31, 1991, two days after the maximum time 

period allowed for filing his motion to extend the time for filing 

the notice of appeal. Because Smith did not file a timely notice 

of appeal, this appeal is DISMISSED. 

-2-

ENTERED FOR THE COURT 

Deanell Reece Tacha 

Circuit Juc_ige 

Appellate Case: 91-6074 Document: 010110132147 Date Filed: 08/22/1991 Page: 2