Sanders v. Trammel
This text of 163 F. App'x 510 (Sanders v. Trammel) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
James H. Sanders appeals pro se from the district court’s denial of his motion for an extension of time to file a notice of appeal from a judgment dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Sanders’s motion for an extension of time for filing a notice of appeal was filed almost three years after his petition was dismissed. The district court had no discretion to grant Sanders’s motion because it was not filed within 180 days after judgment was entered. See Fed. R.App. P. 4(a)(6); In re Stein, 197 F.3d 421, 426 (9th Cir.1999).
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
163 F. App'x 510, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sanders-v-trammel-ca9-2006.