US v. Booker T. Vanderhorst

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to amend/correct [999732468-2] Originating case number: 2:13-cr-00294-PMD-1,2:15-cv-01979-PMD Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999836984]. Mailed to: Booker T. Vanderhorst FCI BEAUMONT - LOW FEDERAL CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION P. O. Box 26020 Beaumont, TX 77720-0000. [16-6016]

Appeal: 16-6016

Doc: 9

Filed: 05/31/2016

Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-6016

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
BOOKER T. VANDERHORST,
Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Charleston.
Patrick Michael Duffy, Senior
District Judge. (2:13-cr-00294-PMD-1; 2:15-cv-01979-PMD)

Submitted:

May 26, 2016

Decided:

May 31, 2016

Before TRAXLER, Chief Judge, and NIEMEYER and FLOYD, Circuit
Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Booker T. Vanderhorst, Appellant Pro Se.
Nathan S. Williams,
Assistant United States Attorney, Charleston, South Carolina, for
Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 16-6016

Doc: 9

Filed: 05/31/2016

Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:
Booker T. Vanderhorst seeks to appeal the district court’s
order denying his motion to amend the record in his 28 U.S.C.
§ 2255 (2012) proceeding.

We dismiss the appeal for lack of

jurisdiction because the order Vanderhorst seeks to appeal is
neither final nor otherwise appealable.

See Cohen v. Beneficial

Indus. Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541, 545-47 (1949); Catlin v. United
States, 324 U.S. 229, 233-34 (1945).
Accordingly, we deny Vanderhorst’s motion asking this court
to amend the record and we dismiss the appeal.

We dispense with

oral

contentions

argument

adequately

because

presented

in

the
the

facts

and

materials

legal
before

this

court

are
and

argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED

2