From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Dunn v. Henderson

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit
Aug 19, 1971
446 F.2d 1398 (5th Cir. 1971)

Opinion

No. 71-2175 Summary Calendar.

Rule 18, 5 Cir., Isbell Enterprises, Inc. v. Citizens Casualty Company of New York et al., 5 Cir. 1970, 431 F.2d 409, Part I.

August 19, 1971.

James Dunn, pro se.

Jack P.F. Gremillion, Atty. Gen. of La., Baton Rouge, La., for respondent-appellee.

Before, BELL, AINSWORTH and GODBOLD, Circuit Judges.



Dunn appeals the district court's denial of his petition for habeas corpus, 312 F. Supp. 1370. Although the court's order was entered on May 15, 1970, the appellant did not file a notice of appeal or any document which might reasonably be construed as such until the March 3, 1971 filing of his motion for a certificate of probable cause. The motion was granted on the same date by the district court.

Since the appellant failed to file a notice of appeal until almost eight months beyond the maximum extended time period provided in Rule 4(a), F.R.A.P., the district court had no authority to issue a certificate of probable cause. This Court therefore has no jurisdiction to adjudicate the appeal. Bean v. Wainwright, 5th Cir. 1971, 437 F.2d 112; Lawrence v. Wainwright, 5th Cir. 1969, 419 F.2d 1326, cert. denied 1970, 397 U.S. 1029, 90 S.Ct. 1281, 25 L.Ed.2d 542; Allen v. Wainwright, 5th Cir. 1967, 384 F.2d 745.

Appeal dismissed.


Summaries of

Dunn v. Henderson

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit
Aug 19, 1971
446 F.2d 1398 (5th Cir. 1971)
Case details for

Dunn v. Henderson

Case Details

Full title:James H. DUNN, Petitioner-Appellant, v. C. Murray HENDERSON, Warden…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit

Date published: Aug 19, 1971

Citations

446 F.2d 1398 (5th Cir. 1971)

Citing Cases

Wesley v. Israel

This time limit is jurisdictional, Browder v. Director of Corrections, 434 U.S. 257, 264, 98 S.Ct. 556, 560,…

Tribbitt v. Wainwright

This time period may be extended an additional 30 days upon a showing of excusable neglect. Jackson v.…