Manuel A. Junes v. Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections, et al, No. 18-12500 (11th Cir. 2024)
Annotate this CaseThis opinion or order relates to an opinion or order originally issued on June 18, 2019.
Download PDF
USCA11 Case: 24-10450 Document: 7-1 Date Filed: 03/15/2024 Page: 1 of 3 [DO NOT PUBLISH] In the United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit ____________________ No. 24-10450 Non-Argument Calendar ____________________ MANUEL A. JUNES, Petitioner-Appellant, versus SECRETARY, FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, FLORIDA ATTORNEY GENERAL, Respondents-Appellees. ____________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida D.C. Docket No. 1:14-cv-21855-MGC USCA11 Case: 24-10450 2 Document: 7-1 Date Filed: 03/15/2024 Opinion of the Court Page: 2 of 3 24-10450 ____________________ Before JORDAN, ROSENBAUM, and JILL PRYOR, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: This appeal is DISMISSED, sua sponte, for lack of jurisdiction. In February 2024, Manuel Junes, a prisoner proceeding pro se, mailed the district court a notice of appeal that appears intended for a state appellate court in a state habeas corpus action. The district court docketed the notice in this federal habeas corpus action that concluded several years ago. The district court entered a final order in this action on May 16, 2018, and we affirmed the denial of habeas relief in June 2019. To the extent that Junes intends to again appeal the final order in this federal case, his appeal is untimely and duplicative. The statutory time limit required Junes to file a notice of appeal on or before November 14, 2018, which was 30 days after the date judgment was deemed entered on the district court’s May 16, 2018 order. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 58(a); Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(7)(A). However, Junes did not file the instant notice of appeal until February 6, 2024. See Fed. R. App. P. 4(c)(1); Jeffries v. United States, 748 F.3d 1310, 1314 (11th Cir. 2014) (noting that a pro se prisoner’s notice of appeal is deemed filed on the date that he delivered it to prison authorities for mailing, and absent contrary evidence, we assume that a prisoner delivered a filing on the date he signed it). Additionally, there is no basis in the record for relief under Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure 4(a)(5) or 4(a)(6). USCA11 Case: 24-10450 24-10450 Document: 7-1 Date Filed: 03/15/2024 Opinion of the Court Page: 3 of 3 3 Accordingly, the notice of appeal is untimely and cannot invoke our appellate jurisdiction. See Green v. Drug Enf’t Admin., 606 F.3d 1296, 1300 (11th Cir. 2010) (noting that the timely filing of a notice of appeal in a civil case is a jurisdictional requirement, and we cannot entertain an appeal that is out of time). Even if Junes’s instant notice of appeal was timely, it is duplicative of his prior appeal before us, appeal no. 18-12500, because it challenges the same judgment that we affirmed. See United States v. Arlt, 567 F.2d 1295, 1297 (5th Cir. 1978) (holding that an appellant “is not entitled to two appeals” from the same judgment); I.A. Durbin, Inc. v. Jefferson Nat’l Bank, 793 F.2d 1541, 1551–52 (11th Cir. 1986) (noting that we have inherent administrative power to dismiss duplicative litigation to avoid wasting judicial resources). No petition for rehearing may be filed unless it complies with the timing and other requirements of 11th Cir. R. 40-3 and all other applicable rules.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
