Fulton v. Davis

Fifth Circuit

Fulton v. Davis

714 F. App'x 448

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedMarch 13, 2018

DocketNo. 17-50403

StatusPublished

This text of 714 F. App'x 448 (Fulton v. Davis) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Fulton v. Davis, 714 F. App'x 448 (5th Cir. 2018).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

*

James Fulton, Jr., Texas prisoner # 1770265, has filed a notice of appeal that is untimely with respect to the denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 application challenging his conviction for murder. See Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(A). It also is untimely with respect to the denial of his motion seeking to reopen the time for appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(A), (c)(1). Alternatively, his request to the district court to reopen the time for appeal was untimely, so his appeal of that denial is without merit. Accordingly, the appeal is DISMISSED. See Hamer v. Neighborhood Hous. Servs. of Chicago, — U.S. -, 138 S.Ct. 13, 16-17, 199 L.Ed.2d 249 (2017); 28 U.S.C. § 2107(a), (c). The motions for a certificate of appeal-ability and leave to proceed in forma pau-peris are DENIED.

Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47,5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir, R. 47.5.4.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM:

*

James Fulton, Jr., Texas prisoner # 1770265, has filed a notice of appeal that is untimely with respect to the denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 application challenging his conviction for murder. See Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(A). It also is untimely with respect to the denial of his motion seeking to reopen the time for appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(A), (c)(1). Alternatively, his request to the district court to reopen the time for appeal was untimely, so his appeal of that denial is without merit. Accordingly, the appeal is DISMISSED. See Hamer v. Neighborhood Hous. Servs. of Chicago, — U.S. -, 138 S.Ct. 13, 16-17, 199 L.Ed.2d 249 (2017); 28 U.S.C. § 2107(a), (c). The motions for a certificate of appeal-ability and leave to proceed in forma pau-peris are DENIED.

Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47,5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir, R. 47.5.4.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

714 F. App'x 448, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fulton-v-davis-ca5-2018.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack