Time Computation, Other Changes in New Appellate Rules
As of today, December 1, among a few other changes, the hard work of the Time Computation Committee has finally come to fruition, doubtless leading to mass confusion for awhile to come. The Criminal Procedure and Appellate Procedure Rules have been changed so that there is no such thing as not counting weekends and holidays. Only calendar days matter. See Fed. R. Crim. P. 45(a)(1)(B) and Fed. R. App. P. 26(a)(1)(B). This change required changing all the references to time limits of 11 days or less [which previously did not count weekends and holidays]. So for the most part all time limits of 10 days are now 14 days, e.g. for notices of appeal. This could make a difference when previously you would get an extra day when there was a holiday mixed within the 10 days. Also, the time to file post-verdict motions for acquittal and new trial and post-judgment motions to correct clear error have changed from 7 to 14 days. Yippee. Time to respond to appellate motions has changed from 8 to 10 days. Reply briefs must be filed within 7 rather than 3 days of oral argument. Boo. Fed. R. App. P. 26(c) clarifies that the 3 days for mailing after service of a document [which applies unless the document is hand-delivered] begins to run only after the date you determine the response would have been due absent the extra three days. Yeah.
Other changes to the criminal procedure rules: Rule 41 specifies that a warrant may authorize the seizure of electronic media and that, unless otherwise stated, that kind of warrant is assumed to allow for a later review of the information in the media. The time for executing the warrant does not restrict when later off-site reviews must be conducted. The inventory may just refer to the "physical storage media" that was seized, not the information found within it.
Rule 32(G) requires the presentence report to specify whether the government seeks forfeiture. Rule 32.2 has been amended with respect to how criminal forfeiture proceedings should be conducted and it states that notice of forfeiture in the indictment should not be designated as a count and need not identify the property or money amount subject to forfeiture.
Rule 11 of the rules governing 2254 and 2255 proceedings has been added. It requires the district court to deny or grant a certificate of appealability at the same time as the final order, i.e., without waiting for the petitioner to file a notice of appeal.
Other changes to the appellate procedure rules: New Rule 12.1 provides for a district court to notify the circuit court when a case is on appeal that the party has filed a motion, [for example a motion for new trial], that the court will grant or that it thinks raises a substantial issue. The circuit court may then remand to the district court for further proceedings before addressing the appeal.
Rule 22 eliminates the requirement that the district court explain why it refuses to issue a certificate of appealability.
The new 10th Circuit Rules go into effect Jan 1, 2010. The changes incorporate the new Rules of Appellate Procedure and reflect the new electronic filing regime.
Other changes to the 10th Circuit rules: most importantly for us brief writers, Rule 28.1(B) suggests a new way to refer to documents in the record where there is no appendix, i.e., when we appeal. For some unknown reason, there should be a reference to the title of the document, as well as the document number and the page number. The example given refers to the title and the date of filing and then the document and page numbers. The rule also says the first such citation should be accompanied by a footnote noting that you are following the convention required by the rule. What a good good, redundant redundant idea.
Now a request for a certificate of appealability is required when the district court has refused to issue one in a non-death-penalty case. Rule 22.2(c)(1)
Rule 27.3(c) notes that opposing counsel need not be consulted when filing a request to withdraw as counsel. Rule 46.3(A) requires counsel to perfect the appeal before seeking withdrawal.
Other changes to the criminal procedure rules: Rule 41 specifies that a warrant may authorize the seizure of electronic media and that, unless otherwise stated, that kind of warrant is assumed to allow for a later review of the information in the media. The time for executing the warrant does not restrict when later off-site reviews must be conducted. The inventory may just refer to the "physical storage media" that was seized, not the information found within it.
Rule 32(G) requires the presentence report to specify whether the government seeks forfeiture. Rule 32.2 has been amended with respect to how criminal forfeiture proceedings should be conducted and it states that notice of forfeiture in the indictment should not be designated as a count and need not identify the property or money amount subject to forfeiture.
Rule 11 of the rules governing 2254 and 2255 proceedings has been added. It requires the district court to deny or grant a certificate of appealability at the same time as the final order, i.e., without waiting for the petitioner to file a notice of appeal.
Other changes to the appellate procedure rules: New Rule 12.1 provides for a district court to notify the circuit court when a case is on appeal that the party has filed a motion, [for example a motion for new trial], that the court will grant or that it thinks raises a substantial issue. The circuit court may then remand to the district court for further proceedings before addressing the appeal.
Rule 22 eliminates the requirement that the district court explain why it refuses to issue a certificate of appealability.
The new 10th Circuit Rules go into effect Jan 1, 2010. The changes incorporate the new Rules of Appellate Procedure and reflect the new electronic filing regime.
Other changes to the 10th Circuit rules: most importantly for us brief writers, Rule 28.1(B) suggests a new way to refer to documents in the record where there is no appendix, i.e., when we appeal. For some unknown reason, there should be a reference to the title of the document, as well as the document number and the page number. The example given refers to the title and the date of filing and then the document and page numbers. The rule also says the first such citation should be accompanied by a footnote noting that you are following the convention required by the rule. What a good good, redundant redundant idea.
Now a request for a certificate of appealability is required when the district court has refused to issue one in a non-death-penalty case. Rule 22.2(c)(1)
Rule 27.3(c) notes that opposing counsel need not be consulted when filing a request to withdraw as counsel. Rule 46.3(A) requires counsel to perfect the appeal before seeking withdrawal.
posted by Anonymous at 1:14 PM
<< Home