IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
April 5, 2011
WILLIAM ERIK MONROE, PETITIONER,
D. G. ADAMS, RESPONDENT.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: James K. Singleton, Jr. United States District Judge
On February 2, 2011, this Court denied Monroe's Petition for Habeas Corpus and declined to issue a certificate of appealability. Under Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure, a litigant who wishes to appeal a civil case must file a notice of appeal within 30 days after the judgment is entered.*fn1 Judgment was entered in this case on February 2, 2011. Monroe failed to timely file a notice of appeal in this Court; although, he did ultimately file a notice of appeal on March 11, 2011. At Docket No. 41 Monroe filed a motion requesting an extension of time to file his notice of appeal. This motion is timely and properly before this Court pursuant to Federal Rule Appellate Procedure 4(a)(5)(A)(i).*fn2
Monroe claims he was unable to timely file his notice of appeal because he was segregated in the Special Housing Unit ("SHU"), awaiting transfer to another facility. He has been released from the SHU but he has remained in lockdown, unable to access his legal paperwork or visit the law library. Since Monroe appears to have diligently pursued his case by filing a notice of appeal with this Court on March 11, 2011, his motion is, hereby, GRANTED. Monroe has an additional 30 days within which to file his notice of appeal, and therefore his notice of appeal filed on March 11, 2011, is timely. Monroe is free to pursue a certificate of appealability in the Court of Appeals.