Bowles v. Russell
Encyclopedia
Bowles v. Russell, 551 U.S. 205 (2007), is a Supreme Court of the United States
case in which the Court determined that the federal courts of appeals
lack jurisdiction
to hear habeas
appeal
s that are filed late, even if the district court
said the petitioner
had additional time to file.
4(a)(6), which allows a district court to grant a 14-day extension under certain conditions. The District Court granted Bowles' motion but inexplicably gave him 17 days to file his notice of appeal. He filed within the 17 days allowed by the District Court, but after the 14-day period allowed by Rule 4(a)(6) and §2107(c). The Sixth Circuit
held that the notice was untimely and that it therefore lacked jurisdiction to hear the case under this Court’s precedent.
The Sixth Circuit decision is published at 432 F. 3d 668 and was written by Chief Judge Danny Julian Boggs
.
had jurisdiction to entertain an appeal filed after the statutory period but within the period allowed by the District Court’s order. We have long and repeatedly held that the time limits for filing a notice of appeal are jurisdictional in nature. Accordingly, we hold that petitioner’s untimely notice—even though filed in reliance upon a District Court’s order-deprived the Court of Appeals jurisdiction.
The dissenting opinion stated "It is intolerable for the judicial system to treat people this way, and there is not even a technical justification for condoning this bait and switch."
(on its own motion) dismiss an appeal which has not been filed within the time limitations authorized by statute, even if the district court told the appellant that he had additional time and the appellant relied on the court's guidance. Rule 4(a)(6) of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure was interpreted that time is of the essence. Additional time granted by the district court judge is not permitted if beyond the stated rules. The ruling may be seen as the Court's attempt to limit the powers of the judicial branch, especially in regard to appeals from criminal convictions.
Supreme Court of the United States
The Supreme Court of the United States is the highest court in the United States. It has ultimate appellate jurisdiction over all state and federal courts, and original jurisdiction over a small range of cases...
case in which the Court determined that the federal courts of appeals
United States courts of appeals
The United States courts of appeals are the intermediate appellate courts of the United States federal court system...
lack jurisdiction
Jurisdiction
Jurisdiction is the practical authority granted to a formally constituted legal body or to a political leader to deal with and make pronouncements on legal matters and, by implication, to administer justice within a defined area of responsibility...
to hear habeas
Habeas corpus
is a writ, or legal action, through which a prisoner can be released from unlawful detention. The remedy can be sought by the prisoner or by another person coming to his aid. Habeas corpus originated in the English legal system, but it is now available in many nations...
appeal
Appeal
An appeal is a petition for review of a case that has been decided by a court of law. The petition is made to a higher court for the purpose of overturning the lower court's decision....
s that are filed late, even if the district court
United States district court
The United States district courts are the general trial courts of the United States federal court system. Both civil and criminal cases are filed in the district court, which is a court of law, equity, and admiralty. There is a United States bankruptcy court associated with each United States...
said the petitioner
Petitioner
A petitioner is a person who pleads with governmental institution for a legal remedy or a redress of grievances, through use of a petition.-In the courts:The petitioner may seek a legal remedy if the state or another private person has acted unlawfully...
had additional time to file.
Early history of the parties
In 1999, Keith Bowles was convicted in the murder of Ollie Gipson. Bowles request to file an appeal under Federal Rule of Appellate ProcedureFederal Rules of Appellate Procedure
The Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure are a set of rules, promulgated by the Supreme Court of the United States on recommendation of an advisory committee, to govern procedures in cases in the United States Courts of Appeals....
4(a)(6), which allows a district court to grant a 14-day extension under certain conditions. The District Court granted Bowles' motion but inexplicably gave him 17 days to file his notice of appeal. He filed within the 17 days allowed by the District Court, but after the 14-day period allowed by Rule 4(a)(6) and §2107(c). The Sixth Circuit
United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
The United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit is a federal court with appellate jurisdiction over the district courts in the following districts:* Eastern District of Kentucky* Western District of Kentucky...
held that the notice was untimely and that it therefore lacked jurisdiction to hear the case under this Court’s precedent.
The Sixth Circuit decision is published at 432 F. 3d 668 and was written by Chief Judge Danny Julian Boggs
Danny Julian Boggs
Danny Julian Boggs is a Judge on the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit. He was appointed to a newly-created seat on that court on January 29, 1986 by President Ronald Reagan, confirmed by the U.S. Senate on March 3, and received his commission on March 25...
.
Supreme Court decision
In this case, a District Court purported to extend a party's time for filing an appeal beyond the period allowed by statute. We must decide whether the Court of AppealsCourt of Appeals
A court of appeals is an appellate court generally.Court of Appeals may refer to:*Military Court of Appeals *Corte d'Assise d'Appello *Philippine Court of Appeals*High Court of Appeals of Turkey*United States courts of appeals...
had jurisdiction to entertain an appeal filed after the statutory period but within the period allowed by the District Court’s order. We have long and repeatedly held that the time limits for filing a notice of appeal are jurisdictional in nature. Accordingly, we hold that petitioner’s untimely notice—even though filed in reliance upon a District Court’s order-deprived the Court of Appeals jurisdiction.
The dissenting opinion stated "It is intolerable for the judicial system to treat people this way, and there is not even a technical justification for condoning this bait and switch."
Impact of the case
The Court ruled that an appellate court may sua sponteSua sponte
In law, sua sponte describes an act of authority taken without formal prompting from another party. The term is usually applied to actions by a judge taken without a prior motion or request from the parties...
(on its own motion) dismiss an appeal which has not been filed within the time limitations authorized by statute, even if the district court told the appellant that he had additional time and the appellant relied on the court's guidance. Rule 4(a)(6) of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure was interpreted that time is of the essence. Additional time granted by the district court judge is not permitted if beyond the stated rules. The ruling may be seen as the Court's attempt to limit the powers of the judicial branch, especially in regard to appeals from criminal convictions.
See also
- List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 551
- Caterpillar Inc. v. Lewis (1996)
- List of United States Supreme Court cases