Lintz v. Chapman

Filing 23

ORDER on Remand Granting Petitioner's Motion to Reopen the Time to File a Notice of Appeal. Signed by District Judge Matthew F. Leitman. (HMon)

Case 4:18-cv-13053-MFL-APP ECF No. 23 filed 09/09/20

PageID.2486

Page 1 of 3

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
KEITH JAMES LINTZ, #889211,
Petitioner,

Case No. 18-cv-13053
Hon. Matthew F. Leitman

v.
WILLIS CHAPMAN,
Respondent.
__________________________________________________________________/
ORDER ON REMAND GRANTING PETITIONER’S MOTION TO
REOPEN THE TIME TO FILE A NOTICE OF APPEAL (ECF No. 19)
This matter is before the Court on limited remand from the United States
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit. (See Order, ECF No. 22.) The Sixth Circuit
has directed this Court determine whether Petitioner Keith James Lintz’s time to file
a notice of appeal should be reopened. (See id.) The Court concludes that it should.
On March 25, 2020, the Court issued an Opinion and Order (1) dismissing
Lintz’s habeas petition, but (2) granting Lintz a certificate of appealability and leave
to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal. (See Op. and Order, ECF No. 17; Judgment
ECF No. 18.) Lintz’s notice of appeal should have been given to prison officials for
mailing by no later than April 24, 2020, in order for it to be considered timely filed.
However, Lintz’s notice is appeal is dated May 4, 2020. (See Notice of Appeal, ECF
No. 19.) Lintz asserted in his notice of appeal that he could not file his appeal earlier

1

Case 4:18-cv-13053-MFL-APP ECF No. 23 filed 09/09/20

PageID.2487

Page 2 of 3

than May 4 because he did not receive notice of the Court’s dispositive decision until
April 20, 2020, and he had limited access to the law library due to the COVID-19
pandemic. (See id., PageID.2477.)
The Sixth Circuit held that Lintz’s May 4, 2020, notice of appeal should be
treated as a motion under Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 4(a)(6) to reopen the
time to file an appeal. (See Order, ECF No. 22, PageID.2485.) Federal Rule of
Appellate Procedure 4(a)(6) provides:
The district court may reopen the time to file an appeal for
a period of 14 days after the date when its order to reopen
is entered, but only if all the following conditions are
satisfied:
(A) the court finds that the moving party did not receive
notice under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 77(d) of the
entry of the judgment or order sought to be appealed from
within 21 days after entry;
(B) the motion is filed within 180 days after the judgment
or order is entered or within 14 days after the moving party
receives notice under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
77(d) of the entry, whichever is earlier; and
(C) the court finds that no party would be prejudiced.
Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(6).
Lintz satisfies these requirements. His pleadings indicate that he did not
receive a copy of the Court’s dispositive decision until April 20, 2020, more than 21
days after it was issued; he filed his notice of appeal (i.e., his request to reopen)
within 14 days of receiving notice of the Court’s decision; and there is no apparent
2

Case 4:18-cv-13053-MFL-APP ECF No. 23 filed 09/09/20

PageID.2488

Page 3 of 3

prejudice to the parties from reopening the time to appeal. The Court therefore
GRANTS Lintz’s motion to reopen the time to file an appeal. Because Lintz already
filed his notice of appeal on May 4, 2020, that notice is timely filed. The Court
DIRECTS the Clerk of the Court to return this case to the Sixth Circuit for further
proceedings.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/Matthew F. Leitman
MATTHEW F. LEITMAN
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Dated: September 9, 2020

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was served upon the
parties and/or counsel of record on September 9, 2020, by electronic means and/or
ordinary mail.
s/Holly A. Monda
Case Manager
[phone]

3