UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE,
v.
JOSE LUIS HERRERA GUITERREZ AND JOSE HERRERA NIETO, DEFENDANTS-APPELLANTS

5th Cir. | 1977-08-04
No. 77-1034
Before GOLDBERG, CLARK and FAY, Circuit Judges.
556 F.2d 1217 Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit (1977) Positive Treatment
Cited by 20 cases

Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM:

PER CURIAM:

Appellants seek review of the denial of their motion to reduce sentence under Fed. R.Crim.P. 35. As recorded in the docket entry, the court denied the motion December 1, 1976. Appellants filed a notice of appeal December 15, 1976. Under Fed.R. App.P. 4(b), the appeal was untimely.

A rule 35 motion is a proceeding in the original criminal prosecution. See Heflin v. United States, 358 U.S. 415, 418 n.7, 79 S.Ct. 451, 3 L.Ed.2d 407 (1959). Accordingly, the 10 day limitation of Fed.R. App.P. 4(b) governs. Appellants’ counsel may be charged with knowledge of the difference between a rule 35 motion and a petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. We remand the ease to allow the district court to determine whether excusable neglect entitles appellants to an extension of the time for appeal.

REMANDED.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

Previewing 3 of 10 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw