Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • United States v. Alexander, 4th Cir. (2007)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    4 views2 pages
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissing an appeal from Timothy Governor Alexander of a magistrate judge's order denying a post-judgment motion in Alexander's 28 U.S.C. § 2255 proceedings. The Court of Appeals found that it did not have jurisdiction over the appeal because the magistrate judge's order was neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order, and that Alexander should have directed any objections to the district court rather than appealing directly to the Court of Appeals. Therefore, the Court dismissed the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2007-12-27 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 07-6902

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissing an appeal from Timothy Governor Alexander of a magistrate judge's order denying a post-judgment motion in Alexander's 28 U.S.C. § 2255 proceedings. The Court of Appeals found that it did not have jurisdiction over the appeal because the magistrate judge's order was neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order, and that Alexander should have directed any objections to the district court rather than appealing directly to the Court of Appeals. Therefore, the Court dismissed the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    4 views2 pages

    United States v. Alexander, 4th Cir. (2007)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissing an appeal from Timothy Governor Alexander of a magistrate judge's order denying a post-judgment motion in Alexander's 28 U.S.C. § 2255 proceedings. The Court of Appeals found that it did not have jurisdiction over the appeal because the magistrate judge's order was neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order, and that Alexander should have directed any objections to the district court rather than appealing directly to the Court of Appeals. Therefore, the Court dismissed the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 2

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 07-6902

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    versus
    TIMOTHY GOVERNOR ALEXANDER,
    Defendant - Appellant.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle
    District of North Carolina, at Durham. James A. Beaty, Jr., Chief
    District Judge. (1:04-cr-00195-JAB; 1:05-cv-01088-JAB)

    Submitted:

    December 20, 2007

    Decided:

    December 27, 2007

    Before MICHAEL and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior


    Circuit Judge.

    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Timothy Governor Alexander, Appellant Pro Se.


    Angela Hewlett
    Miller, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Greensboro, North
    Carolina, for Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    Timothy Governor Alexander seeks to appeal a magistrate
    judges order denying a post-judgment motion in his 28 U.S.C.
    2255 (2000) proceedings.

    This court may exercise jurisdiction

    only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. 1291 (2000), and certain


    interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. 1292 (2000); Fed.
    R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp., 337 U.S.
    541 (1949).

    The magistrate judges order is neither a final order

    nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order.

    United

    States v. Bryson, 981 F.2d 720, 723 (4th Cir. 1992) (magistrate
    judge may hear matters in 2255 proceedings, but may not decide
    them absent explicit consent).
    in

    this

    case

    is

    neither

    Thus, the magistrate judges order


    final

    order

    nor

    an

    appealable

    interlocutory or collateral order; Alexander should have directed


    to the district court any objections to the order.
    636(b) (2000).

    28 U.S.C.

    Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack of

    jurisdiction. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and


    legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before
    the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

    DISMISSED

    - 2 -

    You might also like