Christopher Ball v. Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections, et al

[DO NOT PUBLISH]
In the
United States Court of Appeals
For the Eleventh Circuit
____________________
No. 23-12304
Non-Argument Calendar
____________________
CHRISTOPHER A. BALL,
Petitioner-Appellant,
versus
SECRETARY, FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS,
ATTORNEY GENERAL, STATE OF FLORIDA,
Respondents-Appellees.
____________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Middle District of Florida
D.C. Docket No. 8:14-cv-00336-MSS-TGW
USCA11 Case: 23-12304 Document: 11-1 Date Filed: 12/21/2023 Page: 1 of 3

-- 1 of 3 --

2 Opinion of the Court 23-12304
____________________
Before JORDAN , ROSENBAUM , and L UCK, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
We issued a jurisdictional question regarding whether Chris-
topher Ball’s notice of appeal was timely filed. Ball did not file a
response. Upon review of the appellees’ response, as well as the
record, we conclude that this appeal is untimely and DISMISS it for
lack of jurisdiction.
On June 28, 2021, the district court entered judgment deny-
ing Ball’s 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition. The deadline to file a notice of
appeal from that judgment was July 28, 2021. See 28 U.S.C.
§ 2107(a); Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(A); Brown v. United States, 748 F.3d
1045, 1061, 1062 n.40 (11th Cir. 2014).
In July 2023, the district court received a “Belated Notice of
Appeal,” which Ball dated June 28, 2023. Ball included with that
belated notice a copy of an original notice of appeal that he asserted
was timely filed. Ball’s original notice of appeal bore an institu-
tional stamp marking it as provided to prison authorities for mail-
ing on July 23, 2021, but it was noncompliant with Fed. R. App. P.
4(c) because it did not contain a declaration, notarized statement,
or other evidence indicating prepayment of postage. See Fed. R.
App. P. 4(c)(1)(A). In the more than two years since Ball purport-
edly mailed the original notice of appeal, he has not provided to the
district court or us, despite our identification of the issue in the ju-
risdictional question, any information as to whether the original
USCA11 Case: 23-12304 Document: 11-1 Date Filed: 12/21/2023 Page: 2 of 3

-- 2 of 3 --

23-12304 Opinion of the Court 3
notice was deposited for mailing with prepaid postage by the July
28, 2021, deadline to appeal the judgment. Thus, the prison mail-
box rule does not apply. See Fed. R. App. P. 4(c); Jeffries v. United
States, 748 F.3d 1310, 1314 (11th Cir. 2014). Because Ball did not
timely file a notice of appeal, we lack jurisdiction. See Hamer v.
Neighborhood Hous. Servs. of Chi., 138 S. Ct. 13, 21 (2017); Green v.
Drug Enf’t Admin., 606 F.3d 1296, 1300 (11th Cir. 2010).
All pending motions 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.
USCA11 Case: 23-12304 Document: 11-1 Date Filed: 12/21/2023 Page: 3 of 3

-- 3 of 3 --