Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca10-10-08058/USCOURTS-ca10-10-08058-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Steve Hargett
Appellee
Timothy Daniel Moore
Appellant
Wyoming Attorney General
Appellee

Document Text:

FILED

United States Court of Appeals

Tenth Circuit

August 17, 2010

Elisabeth A. Shumaker

Clerk of Court

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT

TIMOTHY DANIEL MOORE,

 Petitioner - Appellant, 

v. 

WYOMING ATTORNEY GENERAL;

STEVE HARGETT, Warden, Wyoming

Department of Corrections Honor

Conservation Camp, 

 Respondents - Appellees,

No. 10-8058

 (D.C. No. 1:09-CV-00217-ABJ)

 (D. Wyoming)

ORDER

Before KELLY, MURPHY, and HARTZ, Circuit Judges.

On May 13, 2010 the district court entered an order and separate judgment dismissing

Timothy Moore’s petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 as time-barred. Petitioner Moore,

proceeding pro se, appeals. We dismiss for lack of jurisdiction. Petitioner’s notice of appeal

is untimely.

The time limit for filing a notice of appeal in a civil case is “mandatory and

jurisdictional.” Bowles v. Russell, 551 U.S. 205, 214 (2007). The thirty-day deadline under

Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(A) for filing a timely notice of appeal in this civil case expired on

Monday, June 14, 2010. See Fed. R. App. P. 26(a)(1)(C). Petitioner’s notice of appeal was

Appellate Case: 10-8058 Document: 01018478630 Date Filed: 08/17/2010 Page: 1
2

filed on July 26, 2010, which was forty-two days past the thirty-day filing deadline.

Petitioner did not timely move in the district court for an extension of time under Fed. R.

App. P. 4(a)(5), which deadline expired on July 14, 2010. This court may not extend the

time for filing an appeal. See Brumark Corp. v. Samson Resources Corp., 57 F.3d 941, 949

(10th Cir. 1995).

However, contained within the notice of appeal are statements by Petitioner Moore

that he did not receive the May 13, 2010 Order “until on or about July 24, 2010 ” and that

this information can be verified by “viewing the legal mail logs at the Cheyenne Transitional

Center from May 13, 2010 through and including July 24, 2010.” Id. at 2. See generally

Portley-El v. Milyard, 365 F. App’x 912, at *3-4 (10th Cir. Feb. 3, 2010) (discussing Rule

4(a)(6)).

The appeal is DISMISSED for lack of appellate jurisdiction. The case is

REMANDED to the district court for a determination of whether Petitioner Moore’s notice

of appeal should be construed as a motion under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(6).

Entered for the Court,

Elisabeth A. Shumaker, Clerk

Kathleen T. Clifford

Attorney - Deputy Clerk

Appellate Case: 10-8058 Document: 01018478630 Date Filed: 08/17/2010 Page: 2
Case 1:09-cv-00217-ABJ Document 10 Filed 07/26/10 Page 1 of 11

11

Case: 10-8058 Document: 01018466561 Date Filed: 07/28/2010 Page: 9 Case 1:09-cv-00217-ABJ Document 11-2 Filed 07/28/10 Page 9 of 19

Appellate Case: 10-8058 Document: 01018478630 Date Filed: 08/17/2010 Page: 3
Case 1:09-cv-00217-ABJ Document 10 Filed 07/26/10 Page 2 of 11

12

Case: 10-8058 Document: 01018466561 Date Filed: 07/28/2010 Page: 10 Case 1:09-cv-00217-ABJ Document 11-2 Filed 07/28/10 Page 10 of 19

Appellate Case: 10-8058 Document: 01018478630 Date Filed: 08/17/2010 Page: 4