From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States v. Torres-Jacinto

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit
Nov 21, 2008
300 F. App'x 292 (5th Cir. 2008)

Summary

noting that the appellate court may not reverse a district court's enforcement of the time limitations set forth in Rule 4(b) where the defendant did not file his notice of appeal "within the time for extending the appeal period"

Summary of this case from United States v. Taylor

Opinion

No. 08-10543 Summary Calendar.

November 21, 2008.

Denise B. Williams, U.S. Attorney's Office, Northern District of Texas, Lubbock, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Pedro Torres-Jacinto, Winton, NC, pro se.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas, USDC No. 1:06-CR-25-1.

Before SMITH, STEWART and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.


Pedro Torres-Jacinto pleaded guilty pursuant to a written plea agreement to one count of illegal reentry after deportation and was sentenced to 71 months of imprisonment, to be followed by three years of supervised release. Over a year and a half after the judgment of conviction was entered, Torres-Jacinto filed a notice of appeal.

The district court ruled that Torres-Jacinto's notice of appeal was "untimely." In addition, the district court granted Torres-Jacinto leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal but denied his request for appointment of counsel.

Torres-Jacinto now moves this court for the appointment of counsel. This court can dismiss an appeal during consideration of an interlocutory motion if the appeal "is frivolous and entirely without merit." 5TH CIR. R. 42.2. Torres-Jacinto did not file a notice of appeal within 10 days after the entry of the criminal judgment, see FED. R.APP. P. 4(b)(1)(A), or even within the time for extending the appeal period under FED. R.APP. P. 4(b)(4). Thus, the district court did not err in enforcing the time limitations set forth in Rule 4(b), and this court may not reverse its decision to do so. See United States v. Leijano-Cruz, 473 F.3d 571, 574 (5th Cir. 2006). Because the instant appeal is without arguable merit, Torres-Jacinto's motion for the appointment of appellate counsel is denied, and the appeal is dismissed as frivolous. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.

MOTION DENIED; APPEAL DISMISSED.


Summaries of

United States v. Torres-Jacinto

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit
Nov 21, 2008
300 F. App'x 292 (5th Cir. 2008)

noting that the appellate court may not reverse a district court's enforcement of the time limitations set forth in Rule 4(b) where the defendant did not file his notice of appeal "within the time for extending the appeal period"

Summary of this case from United States v. Taylor

noting that it may not reverse a district court's enforcement of the time limitations set in Rule 4(b) when defendant did not file his notice of appeal "within the time for extending the appeal period" under Rule 4(b)

Summary of this case from United States v. Hall
Case details for

United States v. Torres-Jacinto

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Pedro TORRES-JACINTO, also…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit

Date published: Nov 21, 2008

Citations

300 F. App'x 292 (5th Cir. 2008)

Citing Cases

U.S. v. Willis

Because Willis did not file a timely notice of appeal or motion for an extension, the district court did not…

United States v. Taylor

FED. R. APP. P. 4(b)(4); see Willis, 431 F. App'x at 365 (affirming district court's denial of motion to…