Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca10-15-06201/USCOURTS-ca10-15-06201-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Zachary Ryan Suter
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT

_________________________________

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

 Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

ZACHARY RYAN SUTER, 

 Defendant - Appellant.

No. 15-6201

(D.C. No. 5:14-CR-00021-D-1)

(W.D. Okla.)

_________________________________

ORDER

_________________________________

Before BRISCOE, BACHARACH, and PHILLIPS, Circuit Judges.

_________________________________

Defendant Zachary Ryan Suter appeals the district court’s judgment of conviction 

and sentence. The notice of appeal was filed more than one year after filing deadline 

passed. The clerk's office entered an order to show cause questioning jurisdiction and 

challenging the appellant to demonstrate timely filing of the notice of appeal. The 

appellant did not file a response to the jurisdictional challenge, and the time within which 

to do so has elapsed. Upon consideration, we conclude that this appeal should be 

dismissed as untimely.

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

criminal case. Fed. R. App. P. 4(b)(1)(A)(i). Here, the district court’s judgment was 

entered on September 19, 2014. The notice of appeal should have been filed by October 

FILED

United States Court of Appeals

Tenth Circuit

November 16, 2015

Elisabeth A. Shumaker

Clerk of Court

Appellate Case: 15-6201 Document: 01019523823 Date Filed: 11/16/2015 Page: 1 
2

3, 2014. The notice of appeal was not filed until October 15, 2015, long after the 14-day 

filing deadline passed.

The timeliness requirement of Rule 4(b)(1)(A) is an inflexible claim processing 

rule rather than a jurisdictional limitation. United States v. Garduño, 506 F.3d 1287, 

1290-91 (10th Cir. 2007). Although the court is not required to dismiss a late-filed 

criminal appeal unless the government raises the issue first, the court is not prohibited 

from dismissing an untimely criminal appeal sua sponte. The court may dismiss a late 

criminal appeal on its own when judicial or administrative efficiencies are implicated and 

the delay in taking the appeal was “inordinate.” United States v. Mitchell, 518 F.3d 740, 

750 (10th Cir. 2008). We find that raising untimeliness sua sponte is appropriate here. 

We see no reason to wait for the government to move to dismiss the case because the 

delay in filing the notice of appeal was plainly inordinate. And we know of no provision 

in the appellate rules or otherwise that could salvage this untimely appeal.

Based on the foregoing, this appeal is dismissed as untimely.

Entered for the Court

ELISABETH A. SHUMAKER, Clerk

by: Lara Smith

 Counsel to the Clerk

Appellate Case: 15-6201 Document: 01019523823 Date Filed: 11/16/2015 Page: 2