U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, 2025

DeAndre Currington v. Juneau

DeAndre Currington v. Juneau
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Decided February 12, 2025

DeAndre Currington v. Juneau

Opinion

USCA11 Case: 24-13275 Document: 36-1 Date Filed: 02/12/2025 Page: 1 of 3

[DO NOT PUBLISH] In the United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit ____________________ No. 24-13275 Non-Argument Calendar ____________________ DEANDRE D. CURRINGTON, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus COMMANDER JUNEAU, DEPUTY CHIEF BRYAN, DUSTIN R. FOLK, Cpl.,

Defendants-Appellees.

USCA11 Case: 24-13275 Document: 36-1 Date Filed: 02/12/2025 Page: 2 of 3

2 Opinion of the Court 24-13275 ____________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Alabama D.C. Docket No. 1:22-cv-00518-WKW-CWB ____________________ Before JORDAN, NEWSOM, and GRANT, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: This appeal is DISMISSED, sua sponte, for lack of jurisdic- tion. DeAndre D. Currington, a prisoner proceeding pro se, appeals from the district court’s December 28, 2022, judgment dismissing his case. Even if Currington’s numerous post-judgment motions were timely tolling motions, he was required to file a notice of ap- peal from the judgment by October 11, 2023, because the court’s last order resolving such a motion was entered on September 11, 2023. See 28 U.S.C. § 2107(a); Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(A), (a)(4)(A).

However, his notice of appeal was not deemed filed until Septem- ber 21, 2024. See Fed. R. App. P. 4(c)(1); Jeffries v. United States, 748 F.3d 1310, 1314 (11th Cir. 2014) (explaining that, if the date on which an inmate delivered his notice of appeal to institution au- thorities for mailing is not known, and absent contrary evidence, we assume that an inmate delivered his notice to the authorities on the date that he signed it). Accordingly, the notice is untimely and cannot invoke our appellate jurisdiction. See Green v. Drug Enf’t Ad- min., 606 F.3d 1296, 1300 (11th Cir. 2010).

USCA11 Case: 24-13275 Document: 36-1 Date Filed: 02/12/2025 Page: 3 of 3

24-13275 Opinion of the Court 3 Currington’s motions to amend, to compel, for leave to pro- ceed, and for appointment of counsel are DENIED AS MOOT.

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.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.