US v. Sean Robinson

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 3:06-cr-00204-HEH-1. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998454801] [10-6931]

Download PDF
US v. Sean Robinson Doc. 0 Case: 10-6931 Document: 17 Date Filed: 10/28/2010 Page: 1 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-6931 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff Appellee, v. SEAN ANTHONY ROBINSON, a/k/a Black, Defendant Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Henry E. Hudson, District Judge. (3:06-cr-00204-HEH-1) Submitted: October 19, 2010 Decided: October 28, 2010 Before DUNCAN, KEENAN, and WYNN, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Sean Anthony Robinson, Appellant Pro Se. Gurney Wingate Grant, II, Roderick Charles Young, Assistant United States Attorneys, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Dockets.Justia.com Case: 10-6931 Document: 17 Date Filed: 10/28/2010 Page: 2 PER CURIAM: Sean court's order Anthony granting Robinson his seeks to to appeal hold the 18 district U.S.C. motion his 3582(c)(2) (2006) motion for reduction of sentence in abeyance pending a Supreme Court decision. This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. 1291 (2006), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. 1292 (2006); Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541, 545-46 (1949). court has not yet issued we a dispositive the Because the district order appeal on for Robinson's lack of 3582(c)(2) jurisdiction. motion, dismiss 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

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?