Lombardi v. United States

Eleventh Circuit

Lombardi v. United States

126 F. App'x 937

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit

DecidedApril 20, 2005

DocketNo. 04-12691; D.C. Docket Nos. 02-00360-CV-4-RH and 99-00071-CR-4-R

StatusPublished

This text of 126 F. App'x 937 (Lombardi v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Lombardi v. United States, 126 F. App'x 937 (11th Cir. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

In this appeal, appellant challenges the district court’s decision rejecting his Fed. R.Crim.P. 33 motion for new trial based on newly discovered evidence as time-barred because the motion was not filed within the three-year limitations period the rule prescribes. Rule 33’s limitations periods are jurisdictional. United States v. Bramlett, 116 F.3d 1403, 1405 (11th Cir.1997). The district court therefore lacked jurisdiction to consider appellant’s motion.

AFFIRMED.

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

PER CURIAM.

In this appeal, appellant challenges the district court’s decision rejecting his Fed. R.Crim.P. 33 motion for new trial based on newly discovered evidence as time-barred because the motion was not filed within the three-year limitations period the rule prescribes. Rule 33’s limitations periods are jurisdictional. United States v. Bramlett, 116 F.3d 1403, 1405 (11th Cir.1997). The district court therefore lacked jurisdiction to consider appellant’s motion.

AFFIRMED.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

126 F. App'x 937, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lombardi-v-united-states-ca11-2005.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack