[DO NOT PUBLISH]

In the

United States Court of Appeals

For the Eleventh Circuit

____________________

No. 24-10450

Non-Argument Calendar

____________________

MANUEL A. JUNES, 

Petitioner-Appellant,

versus

SECRETARY, FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, 

FLORIDA ATTORNEY GENERAL, 

Respondents-Appellees.

____________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Florida

D.C. Docket No. 1:14-cv-21855-MGC

USCA11 Case: 24-10450 Document: 7-1 Date Filed: 03/15/2024 Page: 1 of 3
2 Opinion of the Court 24-10450

____________________

Before JORDAN, ROSENBAUM, and JILL PRYOR, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

This appeal is DISMISSED, sua sponte, for lack of jurisdiction. In February 2024, Manuel Junes, a prisoner proceeding pro se, 

mailed the district court a notice of appeal that appears intended 

for a state appellate court in a state habeas corpus action. The district court docketed the notice in this federal habeas corpus action 

that concluded several years ago. The district court entered a final 

order in this action on May 16, 2018, and we affirmed the denial of 

habeas relief in June 2019.

To the extent that Junes intends to again appeal the final order in this federal case, his appeal is untimely and duplicative. The 

statutory time limit required Junes to file a notice of appeal on or 

before November 14, 2018, which was 30 days after the date judgment was deemed entered on the district court’s May 16, 2018 order. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 58(a); Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(7)(A). However, 

Junes did not file the instant notice of appeal until February 6, 2024. 

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, and absent contrary evidence, we assume that a prisoner delivered a filing on the date he signed it).

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: 24-10450 Document: 7-1 Date Filed: 03/15/2024 Page: 2 of 3
24-10450 Opinion of the Court 3

Accordingly, the 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).

Even if Junes’s instant notice of appeal was timely, it is duplicative of his prior appeal before us, appeal no. 18-12500, because 

it challenges the same judgment that we affirmed. See United States 

v. Arlt, 567 F.2d 1295, 1297 (5th Cir. 1978) (holding that an appellant 

“is not entitled to two appeals” from the same judgment); I.A. Durbin, Inc. v. Jefferson Nat’l Bank, 793 F.2d 1541, 1551–52 (11th Cir. 

1986) (noting that we have inherent administrative power to dismiss duplicative litigation to avoid wasting judicial resources).

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: 24-10450 Document: 7-1 Date Filed: 03/15/2024 Page: 3 of 3