United States v. Gregory Brown, 817 F.3d 486

Gregory Brown, convicted in 1996 of drug- and violence-related crimes, exhausted direct review and a 2002 § 2255 denial.
In June 2014 Brown filed two motions in district court: a Civil Rule 60(d) motion seeking reconsideration of the prior § 2255 disposition, and an 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c) motion seeking a sentence reduction.
The district court denied both motions on July 30, 2014; it later denied Brown’s August 15 request to vacate the Rule 60(d) denial on August 28.
Brown filed a single notice of appeal on October 1, 2014, challenging the Rule 60(d) decision and the § 3582(c) denial.
The government moved to dismiss the appeal as untimely, arguing different appellate deadlines applied to each underlying motion.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Applicable appeal deadline for Rule 60(d) motion attacking prior § 2255 ruling	Brown: Civil appeal deadline (60 days) applies because Rule 60 motion relates to a § 2255 proceeding	Gov: Impliedly that a shorter criminal deadline might apply	Court: Civil 60-day deadline applies; Brown’s October 1 notice was timely because his Rule 59(e)-style filing tolled and restarted the civil clock
Applicable appeal deadline for § 3582(c) sentence-reduction motion	Brown: (implicitly) his notice of appeal covers § 3582(c) decision despite delay	Gov: Criminal appeal deadline (14 days) controls and Brown’s appeal is late	Court: § 3582(c) is part of the criminal case; 14-day criminal deadline applies and Brown’s appeal of § 3582(c) is untimely and dismissed

Gillis v. United States, 729 F.3d 641 (6th Cir. 2013) (treating § 2255 proceedings under civil appeal timing)
Gonzalez v. Crosby, 545 U.S. 524 (2005) (Rule 60 motions can attack the validity of prior habeas rulings)
United States v. Perry, 360 F.3d 519 (6th Cir. 2004) (Appellate Rule 4(a) governs civil-type appeals in criminal cases)
Ledford v. Thomas, 275 F.3d 471 (5th Cir. 2001) (applying civil appeal deadline to Rule 60 motions tied to habeas)
Manco v. Werholtz, 528 F.3d 760 (10th Cir. 2008) (same)
United States v. Byfield, 522 F.3d 400 (D.C. Cir. 2008) (characterizing § 3582(c) as part of the criminal proceeding)
United States v. Fair, 326 F.3d 1317 (11th Cir. 2003) (holding § 3582(c) is a continuation of the criminal case)
United States v. Ono, 72 F.3d 101 (9th Cir. 1995) (civil appeal provision applies when order is civil in nature)
United States v. Arrango, 291 F.3d 170 (2d Cir. 2002) (criminal appeal deadline applies to § 3582 motions)
United States v. Alvarez, 210 F.3d 309 (5th Cir. 2000) (same)