Legal Opinion · Dissent

United States v. Rodriguez

Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces

Decided January 6, 2009No. 07-0900/MCPublished

1DissentEffron, Chief Judge

In Bowles v. Russell, 551 U.S. 205, 127 S.Ct. 2360, 2364, 168 L.Ed.2d 96 (2007), the Supreme Court reaffirmed its “longstanding treatment of statutory time limits for taking an appeal as jurisdictional” and noted that the Court’s decisions had “recognized the jurisdictional significance of the fact that a time limitation is set forth in a statute.” The Court stated that a limitation is “jurisdictional when Congress forbids federal courts from adjudicating an otherwise legitimate class of cases after a certain period has elapsed from final judgment.” Id. at 2366 (quotation marks omitted). If…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Bowles v. RussellSupreme Court of the United States · 2007
  2. United States v. LarneardUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1977
  3. United States v. PondsUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1952
  4. United States v. ByrdCourt of Appeals for the Armed Forces · 2000
  5. United States v. TamezCourt of Appeals for the Armed Forces · 2006

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API