US v. Shirley Ingram

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 3:10-cr-00069-FDW-1 Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999651537].. [15-6824]

Appeal: 15-6824

Doc: 11

Filed: 09/01/2015

Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-6824

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
SHIRLEY INGRAM, a/k/a Raheem,
Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of North Carolina, at Charlotte.
Frank D. Whitney,
Chief District Judge. (3:10-cr-00069-FDW-1)

Submitted:

August 27, 2015

Decided:

September 1, 2015

Before GREGORY, AGEE, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Shirley Ingram, Appellant Pro Se.
William A. Brafford,
Assistant United States Attorney, Charlotte, North Carolina, for
Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 15-6824

Doc: 11

Filed: 09/01/2015

Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:
Shirley Ingram seeks to appeal the district court’s order
directing

him

to

file

a

response

within

30

days

indicating

whether he agrees to the recharacterization of his Fed. R. Crim.
P. 37 motion as a 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion.
may

exercise

jurisdiction

only

over

final

orders,

This court
28

U.S.C.

§ 1291 (2012), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders,
28

U.S.C.

§ 1292

(2012);

Fed.

R.

Civ.

P.

54(b);

Cohen

Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541, 545-46 (1949).

v.
The

order Ingram seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an
appealable interlocutory or collateral order.
dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.
oral

argument

adequately

because

presented

in

the
the

facts

and

materials

legal
before

Accordingly, we
We dispense with
contentions
this

court

are
and

argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED

2