Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca11-24-13533/USCOURTS-ca11-24-13533-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Jordash Tanksley
Appellant
Augusta SMP Warden
Appellee

Document Text:

[DO NOT PUBLISH]

In the

United States Court of Appeals

For the Eleventh Circuit

____________________

No. 24-13533

Non-Argument Calendar

____________________

JORDASH TANKSLEY, 

Petitioner-Appellant,

versus

AUGUSTA SMP WARDEN, 

Respondent-Appellee.

____________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Georgia

D.C. Docket No. 1:23-cv-00029-JRH-BKE

____________________

USCA11 Case: 24-13533 Document: 10-1 Date Filed: 12/23/2024 Page: 1 of 3
2 Opinion of the Court 24-13533

Before JORDAN, BRANCH, and LUCK, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

This appeal is DISMISSED, sua sponte, for lack of jurisdiction. Jordash Tanksley, a Georgia state prisoner proceeding pro se, 

appeals from the district court’s final order and judgment denying

his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition for a writ of habeas corpus. This appeal arises from Tanksley’s filing of a petition for writ of certiorari, 

which he provided to prison authorities on September 4, 2024, for 

mailing to the United States Supreme Court and to the district 

court. He subsequently mailed a copy of the petition to us, and we 

construed it as a notice of appeal and transmitted it to the district 

court to be docketed as such.

This appeal is untimely. The statutory time limit required 

Tanksley to file a notice of appeal on or before July 24, 2024, which 

was 30 days after the district court entered its second amended 

judgment on June 24, 2024. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 58(a); Fed. R. App. 

P. 4(a)(1), 4(a)(7)(A). However, Tanksley did not file the construed 

notice of appeal until, at the earliest, September 4, 2024, the date 

on which he provided it to prison authorities for mailing to the 

United States Supreme Court and to the district court. See Fed. R. 

App. P. 4(c)(1); Jeffries v. United States, 748 F.3d 1310, 1314 (11th Cir. 

2014) (noting that a pro se prisoner’s notice of appeal is deemed filed 

on the date that he delivered it to prison authorities for mailing).

Additionally, there is no basis in the record for relief under 

Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure 4(a)(5) or 4(a)(6). 

USCA11 Case: 24-13533 Document: 10-1 Date Filed: 12/23/2024 Page: 2 of 3
24-13533 Opinion of the Court 3

Accordingly, the construed notice of appeal is untimely and cannot 

invoke our appellate jurisdiction. See Green v. Drug Enf’t Admin., 606 

F.3d 1296, 1300 (11th Cir. 2010) (noting that the timely filing of a 

notice of appeal in a civil case is a jurisdictional requirement, and 

we cannot entertain an appeal that is out of time).

All pending motions are DENIED as moot. No petition for 

rehearing may be filed unless it complies with the timing and other 

requirements of 11th Cir. R. 40-3 and all other applicable rules.

USCA11 Case: 24-13533 Document: 10-1 Date Filed: 12/23/2024 Page: 3 of 3