On September 13, 2022, eighty-three days after the district court entered judgment denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion, Joseph Reho, proceeding pro se, moved for an extension of time to apply for a certificate of appealability and to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal. If Reho’s motion was a notice of appeal, it was three weeks late, and we must dismiss for lack of jurisdiction. See 28 U.S.C. § 2107(b)(1); Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(B)(i). But Reho’s motion, which repeatedly asks for an extension of time, is better construed as a motion for extension of time to file a notice of appeal. See 28 U.S.C. § 2107(c); Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5)(A). Accordingly, we remand for the district court to consider whether to grant Reho’s motion.

We therefore REMAND to the district court to determine whether Reho has shown excusable neglect or good cause so as to merit an extension of time to file a notice of appeal. See Bell v. McAdory, 820 F.3d 880, 884 (7th Cir. 2016) (citing 28 U.S.C. § 2106). If the district court, on remand, grants Reho’s motion for extension of time pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2107(c), Reho must file a separate notice of appeal in the district court before this court can consider his application for a certificate of appealability.

A Shelby County jury found the Defendant, Demarcus Wooten, guilty of the offenses of first degree murder, attempted first degree murder, and employing a firearm during the commission of a dangerous felony. The trial court imposed a total effective sentence of life plus twenty-nine years. On appeal, the Defendant argues that the evidence is insufficient to sustain his murder and attempted murder convictions, arguing principally that the proof did not establish the elements of intent and premeditation. We respectfully disagree, and we affirm the judgments of the trial court.

This case concerns the administration of a generation-skipping exempt trust. On review of the record, we conclude that the trial court’s order is not a final judgment, so as to confer subject matter jurisdiction on this Court. Specifically, the trial court did not adjudicate: (1) the parties’ requests for attorney’s fees; (2) Appellees’ prayer to remove David M. Sullivan as trustee; (3) Appellees’ motion to disqualify David M. Sullivan from acting as legal counsel for the Trust; or (4) Trustee’s motion for sanctions against Appellees and Appellees’ legal counsel. Appeal dismissed.

The Petitioner, Christopher Brown, was convicted of one count of first degree murder and three counts of aggravated assault by a Shelby County jury. The Petitioner later filed a petition for post-conviction relief alleging that he was denied the effective assistance of counsel when trial counsel failed to disclose discovery materials and failed to call particular witnesses. The post-conviction court denied the petition after an evidentiary hearing. On appeal, we affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court.

For the week of November 7, 2022 - November 11, 2022

In this case involving termination of the mother’s parental rights to her child, the Davidson County Juvenile Court (“trial court”) determined that several statutory grounds for termination had been proven by clear and convincing evidence. The trial court further determined that clear and convincing evidence established that termination of the mother’s parental rights was in the child’s best interest. The mother has appealed. Having determined that three of the statutory grounds were not supported by sufficient findings of fact and conclusions of law, we reverse the trial court’s judgment with respect to the grounds of abandonment by an incarcerated parent by failure to support, abandonment by exhibiting wanton disregard for the child’s welfare prior to incarceration, and failure to manifest an ability and willingness to assume custody of or financial responsibility for the child. We affirm the trial court’s judgment in all other respects, including the termination of the mother’s parental rights.

PER CURIAM. Caudill Seed & Warehouse Co. manufactures an important ingredient in certain nutritional supplements. Jarrow Formulas, Inc., a customer of Caudill’s, wanted to get into this manufacturing business. To do this, Jarrow decided to lure away Caudill’s Director of Research, Kean Ashurst, and learn Caudill’s manufacturing process from him. Caudill, understandably displeased, proceeded to federal court. Eight years later, a jury awarded Caudill approximately $7,000,000 in damages under the Kentucky Uniform Trade Secrets Act (“KUTSA”). Jarrow appeals the district court’s denial of its motions for judgment notwithstanding the verdict and for a new trial. We AFFIRM.

The petitioner, Jacob Tate, appeals the denial of his petition for post-conviction relief, which petition challenged his 2018 guilty-pleaded convictions of especially aggravated kidnapping and rape, arguing that he was deprived of the effective assistance of counsel and that his guilty pleas were not knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently entered. Discerning no error, we affirm.

Aggrieved of his Williamson County Circuit Court jury convictions of aggravated kidnapping, simple possession, violating the financial responsibility law, speeding, and the improper use of a vehicle registration, the defendant, Terry James Lee, appeals. In this appeal, the defendant challenges the sufficiency of the convicting evidence, the admission of evidence of certain uncharged conduct, and the admission of certain of his pretrial statements to the police. Discerning no error, we affirm.

The appellant, Agness McCurry, has appealed the September 29, 2022 order of the Circuit Court for Washington County (“the Trial Court”). Because the September 29, 2022 order does not constitute a final appealable judgment, this Court lacks jurisdiction to consider this appeal.