Riddle v. Reiser
- Susan Nelson
- 0:10-cv-03128
- U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
- 4
Riddle v. Reiser: Judge Nelson denied reconsideration and Riddle’s request to appeal without paying fees, and denied as moot his excusable-neglect request because the appeal was years late.
Derrick Riddle’s attempted appeal from the 2011 judgment and his related requests for reconsideration, a finding of excusable neglect, and permission to appeal without paying the filing fee.
What happened
In Riddle v. Reiser, Derrick Riddle challenged a state-court conviction by asking for federal review. The court denied his petition and entered judgment on August 29, 2011. Riddle filed a notice of appeal on December 17, 2019.
The court ruled that the appeal was far too late for it to extend or reopen the appeal deadline. It denied Riddle’s request to reconsider the earlier denial of a certificate required to appeal, denied as moot his request for a finding of excusable neglect, and denied his request to appeal without paying filing fees.
Judge Susan Richard Nelson issued the order on January 29, 2020. She stated that Riddle had not shown the earlier certificate decision was wrong and that the late appeal could not be considered taken in good faith.
The detailed version
- Riddle v. Reiser · No. 0:10-cv-03128
- Susan Nelson
- Jan. 29, 2020
Background
Derrick Riddle, the petitioner, had challenged the validity of a state-court conviction through a petition for federal habeas review. The court denied the petition, dismissed the matter, and entered judgment on August 29, 2011. Riddle later filed a notice of appeal on December 17, 2019, along with a motion asking the court to reconsider its earlier decision not to issue a certificate of appealability. A certificate of appealability is required in this type of case before a petitioner may appeal an adverse ruling. Riddle also asked to proceed on appeal without paying the filing fee.
Appeal deadline
The court explained that the ordinary deadline for filing a notice of appeal was 30 days after entry of the judgment. Riddle filed 3,002 days after that deadline. The court also explained that a request to extend the deadline based on excusable neglect or good cause had to be filed within the additional period allowed by the appellate rules, and that a request to reopen the deadline based on lack of notice had to be filed within 180 days after judgment, subject to the rule’s other conditions. Those deadlines had also passed. The court therefore concluded that it was too late to extend or reopen the appeal period.
The court rejected Riddle’s argument that he had not received the order denying his petition and dismissing the case. It stated that lack of notice or excusable neglect could not overcome the separate filing deadlines. Riddle’s request for a finding of excusable neglect was therefore DENIED AS MOOT.
Certificate of appealability and filing fee
The court said that Riddle had not identified anything showing that its earlier denial of a certificate of appealability was erroneous. It also said the certificate question was largely moot because Riddle could not pursue an appeal at that time even if a certificate were granted. The motion to reconsider was DENIED.
The court further ruled that the extreme delay meant the appeal could not be considered taken in good faith under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3). Riddle’s application to proceed without paying the filing fee on appeal was DENIED.
Disposition
Judge Susan Richard Nelson ordered that Riddle’s motion to reconsider was DENIED; his motion for a finding of excusable neglect was DENIED AS MOOT; and his application to proceed without paying the filing fee on appeal was DENIED.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.