Pitre v. Cockrell
This text of Pitre v. Cockrell (Pitre v. Cockrell) 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.
Opinion
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 00-11284 Conference Calendar
TORIANO DESHAWN PITRE,
Petitioner-Appellant,
versus
JANIE COCKRELL, TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, INSTITUTIONAL DIVISION,
Respondent-Appellee.
-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 3:99-CV-1861-D -------------------- October 25, 2001
Before WIENER, BENAVIDES, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Because counsel for Toriano Deshawn Pitre, Texas prisoner
No. 00725400, did not file a notice of appeal from the district
court’s denial of Pitre’s 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition within the
requisite 30-day filing period, the appeal must be DISMISSED.
Mosley v. Cozby, 813 F.2d 659, 660 (5th Cir. 1987); see Nelson v.
Foti, 707 F.2d 170, 171 (5th Cir. 1983); FED. R. APP.
P. 4(a)(1)(A). Counsel’s reliance on FED. R. CIV. P. 6(e) is
misplaced. Rule 6(e) does not extend the limitations period for
* 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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. No. 00-11284 -2-
filing a notice of appeal. Welsh v. Elevating Boats, Inc., 698
F.2d 230, 231-32 (5th Cir. 1983); Reynolds v. Hunt Oil Co., 643
F.2d 1042, 1043 (5th Cir. 1981).
Pitre’s motion for a certificate of appealability (COA) is
DENIED AS MOOT.
APPEAL DISMISSED; MOTION FOR COA DENIED AS MOOT.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Pitre v. Cockrell, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pitre-v-cockrell-ca5-2001.