Herron v. Patrolman 1 , 80 F. App'x 946 ( 2003 )


Menu:
  •                                                        United States Court of Appeals
    Fifth Circuit
    F I L E D
    IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT                November 18, 2003
    Charles R. Fulbruge III
    Clerk
    No. 03-20590
    Summary Calendar
    LARRY LEONARD HERRON,
    Plaintiff-Appellant,
    versus
    PATROLMAN # 1; PATROLMAN # 2; DEPUTY,
    Defendants-Appellees.
    -----------------------
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the Southern District of Texas
    USDC No. H-02-CV-3415
    -----------------------
    Before SMITH, DeMOSS, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.
    PER CURIAM:*
    This court must examine the basis of its jurisdiction on
    its own motion if necessary.   Mosley v. Cozby, 
    813 F.2d 659
    , 660
    (5th Cir. 1987).   Rule 4(a)(1), FED. R. APP. P., requires that
    the notice of appeal in a civil action be filed within 30 days
    of entry of the judgment.   In this civil rights action, the final
    judgment was entered on April 24, 2003.     The final day for filing
    a timely notice of appeal was May 27, 2003.     See FED. R. APP. P.
    26(a)(3) (last day of period is excluded if it is Saturday,
    *
    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    this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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. 03-20590
    - 2 -
    Sunday, or legal holiday).     Herron dated his pro se notice of
    appeal May 5, 2003 (within the appeal period), but the notice is
    stamped as filed on June 2, 2003 (outside the appeal period).
    A prisoner’s pro se notice of appeal is deemed timely filed if
    deposited in the institution’s internal mail system on or before
    the last day for filing.     See FED. R. APP. P. 4(c)(1).   As it
    cannot be determined from the record in this case whether Herron
    deposited his notice of appeal in the prison mail system on or
    before May 27, 2003, the case must be remanded to the district
    court to make such a determination.     See Thompson v. Montgomery,
    
    853 F.2d 287
    , 288 (5th Cir. 1988).
    Upon making this determination, the district court shall
    return the case to this court for further proceedings, or
    dismissal, as may be appropriate.
    Herron’s motion for appointment of counsel is DENIED at this
    time.
    REMANDED; MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL DENIED.
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 03-20590

Citation Numbers: 80 F. App'x 946

Judges: Demoss, Per Curiam, Smith, Stewart

Filed Date: 11/18/2003

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 8/1/2023