Summary
The United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit dismissed Daniel Latella's appeal from the denial of his federal habeas corpus petition. The court held that the notice of appeal was untimely under Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 4 and that a pending or denied certificate of probable cause did not eliminate the jurisdictional requirement of a timely notice of appeal.
Holdings
- A notice of appeal in a civil case must be filed within the period prescribed by Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 4(a)(1), and a timely Rule 59(e) motion tolls that period only until entry of the order denying the motion. Because Latella filed his notice of appeal seventy-one days after the appeal period began to run, the court lacked appellate jurisdiction.
- An application for a certificate of probable cause does not remove the jurisdictional prerequisite of filing a timely notice of appeal. The appropriate procedure is to file a timely notice of appeal, then seek a certificate of probable cause; the appeal cannot proceed without the certificate, but the certificate application does not extend the time to appeal.
Questions Presented
- Whether the Second Circuit had appellate jurisdiction when the notice of appeal was filed seventy-one days after entry of the order denying a timely Rule 59(e) motion.
- Whether an application for a certificate of probable cause postponed or eliminated the requirement that a habeas applicant first file a timely notice of appeal.
Disposition
dismissed
Cases Cited (4)
- Griggs v. Provident Consumer Discount Co., 459 U.S. 56 (1982)(followed)
- Browder v. Director, Department of Corrections of Illinois, 434 U.S. 257 (1978)(followed)
- Clements v. Wainwright, 648 F.2d 979, 980 (5th Cir. 1981)(followed)
- Klier v. Wainwright, 464 F.2d 1245 (5th Cir. 1972), cert. denied, 409 U.S. 1129 (1973)(followed)
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…