Opinion
2:08-cr-00093-KJM 2:08-cr-00116-KJM
10-18-2022
THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. CHARLES HEAD, Defendant.
ORDER
Defendant Charles Head moved for compassionate release under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i) in the two cases captioned above. See Mot. Vacate, ECF No. 1734, No. 2:08-CR-00093-KJM (Head I); Mot. Vacate, ECF No. 975, No. 2:08-CR-00116-KJM (HeadII). On June 7, 2022, this court denied both of defendant's motions in a single order. Head I Order, ECF No. 1792; HeadII Order, ECF No. 1044. On June 21, 2022, defendant filed an appeal of this order to the Ninth Circuit in Head I. HeadI Not. ECF No. 1798. This appeal was processed and is pending in the Ninth Circuit (case number 22-10154). However, this appeal and corresponding notice did not include the case number for Head II. See id. Defendant contends this omission was “[a] mere oversight or excusable neglect by a defendant proceeding pro se.” Head I Mot. at 2, ECF No. 1825. On September 15, 2022, Head filed a separate notice of appeal in Head II. Head II Not., ECF No. 1063.
Defendant now moves this court to construe his notice of appeal in Head I to include the case number for Head II. See Head I Mot. at 2; Head II Mot. at 2, ECF No. 1065. Additionally, defendant asks the court to deem his appeal filing date in Head II as June 21, 2022, when he filed his appeal in Head I. Id. Finally, defendant requests the Ninth Circuit process and join his appeal in Head I with his appeal in Head II. See Head I Mot. at 2-3; Head II Mot. at 2-3. For the reasons below, the court denies the motion in both cases for lack of jurisdiction.
Federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction and, until proven otherwise, cases lie outside the jurisdiction of the court. Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Ins. Co. of Am., 511 U.S. 375, 377 (1994). Lack of subject matter jurisdiction may be raised sua sponte by the court. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(h)(3); see also Ruhrgas AG v. Marathon Oil Co., 526 U.S. 574, 583-84 (1999). Once a defendant files a notice of appeal, the district court lacks jurisdiction to consider any further motions. See Griggs v. Provident Consumer Disc. Co., 459 U.S. 56, 58, 103 S.Ct. 400, 402, 74 L.Ed.2d 225 (1982) (“The filing of a notice of appeal is an event of jurisdictional significance -it confers jurisdiction on the court of appeals and divests the district court of its control over those aspects of the case involved in the appeal.”).
Here, plaintiff filed his motion in Head I on September 21, 2022, over two months after filing his notice of appeal on June 21, 2022. Similarly, plaintiff filed his motion in Head II on September 21, 2022, five days after filing his notice to appeal on September 16, 2022.
For the reasons, the motion is denied.
This order resolves ECF No. 1825 in case number 2:08-CR-00093-KJM and ECF No. 1065 in case number 2:08-cr-00116-KJM.
IT IS SO ORDERED.