Hendon v. Burton
- Haywood Gilliam
- 4:23-cv-02775
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 5
In Hendon v. Burton, Judge Gilliam reopened Carlos Duane Hendon’s appeal deadline and deemed his notice timely.
Carlos Duane Hendon’s appeal deadline was reopened, allowing his notice of appeal to be treated as timely; the order did not decide the merits of his habeas petition.
What happened
In Hendon v. Burton, Carlos Duane Hendon filed a petition challenging his custody without a lawyer. The court dismissed that petition on November 11, 2023, and Hendon later filed a notice of appeal after receiving the dismissal papers late because they were sent to an outdated address.
The Ninth Circuit sent the matter back for the limited purpose of deciding whether to reopen the appeal deadline. The court found that Hendon did not receive notice within 21 days, filed his request within the required time after receiving notice, and that reopening the deadline would not prejudice the defendants.
Judge Haywood Gilliam granted Hendon’s request to reopen the time for filing an appeal and deemed his notice of appeal timely filed on December 25, 2023. The court directed the Clerk to send the order to the Ninth Circuit.
The detailed version
- Hendon v. Burton · No. 4:23-cv-02775
- Haywood Gilliam
- Feb. 6, 2024
Background
Carlos Duane Hendon filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus, meaning a court challenge to the legality of his custody, without a lawyer. On November 11, 2023, the court dismissed the petition as second or successive under 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(2), denied a certificate of appealability, and entered judgment for Robert Burton.
Hendon filed a notice of appeal on December 25, 2023. He stated that he did not receive the November 11 orders when they were first mailed because they were sent to his prior address at California Health Care Facility. He said he received courtesy copies at R.J. Donovan Facility on December 18, 2023. The Ninth Circuit construed his notice of appeal as a request to reopen the appeal period under Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 4(a)(6) and returned the matter to the district court for that limited purpose.
Legal standard and findings
Rule 4(a)(6) allows a district court to reopen the time for filing an appeal for 14 days if three requirements are met: the person did not receive the required notice of the judgment within 21 days after it was entered; the request was filed within the rule’s time limits; and reopening the appeal period would not prejudice another party.
The court found that Hendon did not receive notice of the November 11 dismissal order within 21 days because he was no longer at the address to which it was mailed. Applying the prison mailbox rule, which treats a prisoner’s filing as filed when delivered to prison authorities, the court treated the request as filed on December 25, 2023—44 days after judgment and seven days after Hendon received notice. The court also found that the record did not indicate that the defendants would be prejudiced.
Ruling
Judge Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr. granted Hendon’s request to reopen the time to file an appeal and deemed his notice of appeal timely filed on December 25, 2023. The court directed the Clerk to transmit the order to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals and terminated Docket No. 18. This order addressed the appeal deadline; it did not reconsider the earlier dismissal of the petition.
Effect
The ruling permits Hendon’s notice of appeal to proceed as timely filed. The opinion does not state what the Ninth Circuit will decide on appeal.
Read the full 5-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.