Court Opinion

ID: 9901673
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-11-22 14:00:40.781493+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:21:36.988978
License: Public Domain

USCA11 Case: 22-13572    Document: 36-1     Date Filed: 11/22/2023   Page: 1 of 2

                                                  [DO NOT PUBLISH]
                                   In the
                United States Court of Appeals
                        For the Eleventh Circuit

                          ____________________

                                No. 22-13572
                          Non-Argument Calendar
                          ____________________

       UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
                                                      Plaintiﬀ-Appellee,
       versus
       TIMOTHY ALLEN PHILLIPS,

                                                  Defendant- Appellant.

                          ____________________

                 Appeal from the United States District Court
                    for the Northern District of Alabama
                  D.C. Docket No. 2:20-cr-00038-AKK-JHE-1
                          ____________________
USCA11 Case: 22-13572         Document: 36-1         Date Filed: 11/22/2023         Page: 2 of 2

       2                          Opinion of the Court                       22-13572

       Before JILL PRYOR, NEWSOM, and LUCK, Circuit Judges.
       PER CURIAM:
              The government’s motion to dismiss this appeal as untimely
       is GRANTED. Timothy Phillips’s October 21, 2022 notice of ap-
       peal is untimely to challenge the final criminal judgment and sen-
       tence entered on November 3, 2021. See Fed. R. App. P. 4(b)(1)(A)
       (providing that in criminal cases, a defendant’s notice of appeal
       must be filed within 14 days after the entry of the judgment or or-
       der being appealed); United States v. Lopez, 562 F.3d 1309, 1313-14
       (11th Cir. 2009) (holding that we must apply Rule 4(b)’s 14-day time
       limit when the government objects to an untimely notice of ap-
       peal).
              While Phillips argues that the government forfeited a time-
       liness objection by failing to raise it sooner, the government may
       object to timeliness “for the first time” in its response brief. See
       Lopez, 562 F.3d at 1313. Here, the government has not yet filed its
       response brief, and it filed its motion before the deadline for that
       brief. Accordingly, this appeal is DISMISSED. 1

       1 Phillips’s alternative request for appointment of counsel in seeking relief un-

       der 28 U.S.C. § 2255 is DENIED without prejudice to him seeking such relief
       in the district court.