United States v. Dennis Suesue

Good Law
584 F. App'x 705
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitAugust 29, 201412-35526California776 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Dennis Suesue appeals from the district court’s denial of Suesue’s 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion that alleged ineffective assistance of counsel by his appointed counsel during the plea bargaining process.

We dismiss Suesue’s appeal for lack of jurisdiction due to an untimely notice of appeal. “The timely filing of a notice of appeal in a civil case is a jurisdictional requirement.” Bowles v. Russell, 551 U.S. 205, 214 , 127 S.Ct. 2360 , 168 L.Ed.2d 96 (2007). Appeals that are not timely filed “must be dismissed for want of jurisdiction.” Id. at 213 , 127 S.Ct. 2360 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). A party has 60 days to file a notice of appeal if one of the parties is the United States. F.R.App. P. 4(a)(1)(B). If a party timely files a Rule 59 or Rule 60 motion pursuant to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, then “the time to file an appeal runs for all parties from the entry of the order disposing of the last such remaining motion.” F.R.App. P. 4(a)(4)(A)(iv)-(vi). A Rule 59 or Rule 60 motion is timely if it is filed no later than 28 days after the judgment is entered. Id.

On January 26, 2012, the district court entered judgment on Suesue’s § 2255…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.