United States v. Lopez-Reynoso ( 2021 )


Menu:
  • Case: 21-50168     Document: 00516003599         Page: 1     Date Filed: 09/07/2021
    United States Court of Appeals
    for the Fifth Circuit                             United States Court of Appeals
    Fifth Circuit
    FILED
    September 7, 2021
    No. 21-50168                         Lyle W. Cayce
    Summary Calendar                            Clerk
    United States of America,
    Plaintiff—Appellee,
    versus
    Gustavo Adolfo Lopez-Reynoso,
    Defendant—Appellant.
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the Western District of Texas
    USDC No. 1:16-CR-77-1
    Before Southwick, Graves, and Costa, Circuit Judges.
    Per Curiam:*
    Gustavo Adolfo Lopez-Reynoso appeals the district court’s denial of
    his motion for reconsideration of the denial of his motion for compassionate
    release under 
    18 U.S.C. § 3582
    (c)(1)(A)(i). His notice of appeal is untimely
    *
    Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 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    opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited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 Circuit Rule 47.5.4.
    Case: 21-50168      Document: 00516003599          Page: 2    Date Filed: 09/07/2021
    No. 21-50168
    because it was filed 34 days after entry of the underlying order. See Fed.
    R. App. P. 4(b)(1)(A)(i).
    The Government moves to dismiss the appeal based on the untimely
    notice of appeal and, alternately, moves for an extension of time to file its
    brief. The Rule 4(b) time limit, although not jurisdictional, is mandatory.
    United States v. Hernandez-Gomez, 
    795 F.3d 510
    , 511 (5th Cir. 2015); see also
    Manrique v. United States, 
    137 S. Ct. 1266
    , 1272 (2017).
    A district court may extend the time to file a notice of appeal for 30
    days based on a finding of excusable neglect or good cause. Fed. R. App.
    P. 4(b)(4). Lopez-Reynoso’s notice of appeal, filed within this 30-day
    period, is construed as a motion for an extension of time based on excusable
    neglect. See United States v. Golding, 
    739 F.2d 183
    , 184 (5th Cir. 1984).
    Accordingly, this case is REMANDED to the district court for the
    limited purpose of determining whether there is excusable neglect or good
    cause to warrant an extension of time. Upon making this finding, the district
    court shall promptly return the case to this court for further proceedings. The
    Government’s motion to dismiss or, alternately, for an extension of time to
    file its brief, is CARRIED WITH THE CASE.
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 21-50168

Filed Date: 9/7/2021

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 9/7/2021