Jerry Castillo, Jr. v. David Munoz

682 F. App'x 297
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
DecidedMarch 17, 2017
Docket15-50878
StatusUnpublished

This text of 682 F. App'x 297 (Jerry Castillo, Jr. v. David Munoz) 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
Jerry Castillo, Jr. v. David Munoz, 682 F. App'x 297 (5th Cir. 2017).

Opinion

PER CURIAM: *

Jerry Castillo, Jr., Texas prisoner # 2074055, has filed a motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP) to appeal the district court’s denial of his motion for relief from judgment under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b). He has also filed motions for the appointment of counsel and production of certain documents.

“This Court must examine the basis of its jurisdiction, on its own motion, if necessary.” Mosley v. Cozby, 813 F.2d 659, 660 (5th Cir.1987). A timely notice of appeal is a jurisdictional requirement in a civil ease. Bowles v. Russell, 551 U.S. 205, 214, 127 S.Ct. 2360, 168 L.Ed.2d 96 (2007). Castillo had 30 days, or until April 8,2015, to file a timely notice of appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(A). He did not file a notice of appeal until well after this appeal period expired. The untimely notice of appeal could not be construed as a motion for an extension of time. See Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5)(A); Henry v. Estelle, 688 F.2d 407, 407 (5th Cir. 1982). Castillo’s subsequent motion for leave to proceed IFP and the denial thereof do not affect the untimeliness of this appeal. See Briggs v. Lucas, 678 F.2d 612, 613 (5th Cir. 1982).

Accordingly, the appeal is DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction, and Castillo’s motions are DENIED AS MOOT.

*

Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.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

Related

Bowles v. Russell
551 U.S. 205 (Supreme Court, 2007)
Ronald D. Briggs v. Eddie Lucas, Warden
678 F.2d 612 (Fifth Circuit, 1982)
Marion Ray Mosley v. Officer M.D. Cozby
813 F.2d 659 (Fifth Circuit, 1987)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
682 F. App'x 297, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jerry-castillo-jr-v-david-munoz-ca5-2017.