Debnam v. Salazar, No. 21-50044 (5th Cir. 2021)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Case: 21-50044 Document: 00516135894 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/17/2021 United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED December 17, 2021 No. 21-50044 Summary Calendar Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Kevin Debnam, Plaintiff—Appellant, versus Javier Salazar, Sheriff, Bexar County; San Antonio Police Officer D. Elliott, (Badge #969), Defendants—Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 5:19-CV-1100 Before Stewart, Haynes, and Ho, Circuit Judges. Per Curiam:* Kevin Debnam, Texas prisoner # 1074319, moves for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP) on appeal from the district court’s dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 lawsuit. This court must examine the basis of its own * Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Circuit Rule 47.5.4. Case: 21-50044 Document: 00516135894 Page: 2 Date Filed: 12/17/2021 No. 21-50044 jurisdiction, sua sponte, if necessary. Trent v. Wade, 776 F.3d 368, 387 (5th Cir. 2015). “[T]he timely filing of a notice of appeal in a civil case is a jurisdictional requirement.” Bowles v. Russell, 551 U.S. 205, 214 (2007). A notice of appeal in a civil case must be filed within 30 days of the entry of the judgment or order being appealed. FED. R. APP. P. 4(a)(1)(A). Here, final judgment was entered on May 26, 2020. Debnam did not file his notice of appeal until January 22, 2021, several months too late. Although he asserted that his lawsuit had been “dismissed without his knowing,” his untimely notice of appeal cannot be treated as a request for an extension of time based on excusable neglect or good cause under Rule 4(a)(5) as such motions must be filed within 30 days of the entry of judgment. See FED. R. APP. P. 4(a)(5). Debnam similarly has not demonstrated that he could meet the requirements for reopening the time for filing an appeal under Rule 4(a)(6) such that his untimely notice of appeal should be construed as such a request. See FED. R. APP. P. 4(a)(6). Accordingly, Debnam’s appeal is DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction. His motion for leave to proceed IFP on appeal is DENIED. 2
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.
