US v. John Elinski


UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [999922510-2]; denying Motion for other relief [999939016-2] Originating case number: 1:14-cr-00431-LMB-1,1:16-cv-00065-LMB. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [1000014747]. Mailed to: John Richard Elinski. [16-7183]

Download PDF
Appeal: 16-7183 Doc: 12 Filed: 02/01/2017 Pg: 1 of 2 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 16-7183 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. JOHN RICHARD ELINSKI, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Leonie M. Brinkema, District Judge. (1:14-cr-00431-LMB-1; 1:16-cv-00065-LMB) Submitted: January 26, 2017 Decided: February 1, 2017 Before SHEDD, DIAZ, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. John Richard Elinski, Appellant Pro Se. Matthew John Gardner, Assistant United States Attorney, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Appeal: 16-7183 Doc: 12 Filed: 02/01/2017 Pg: 2 of 2 PER CURIAM: John Richard Elinski seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his motion to amend his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion. Elinski’s original § 2255 motion was dismissed by the district court on February 5, 2016, and his motion to amend was filed on June 2, 2016, after this court had dismissed the appeal of the original motion. Because Elinski’s § 2255 motion was no longer pending before the district court, we find no error by the district court in denying Elinski’s motion to amend. See United States v. Craycraft, 167 F.3d 451, 457 n.6 (8th Cir. 1999) (noting that the civil rules apply to § 2255 actions and that motions to amend are reviewed under Fed. R. Civ. P. 15 for an abuse of discretion). Accordingly, we deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis, deny Elinski’s motion to submit evidence in support of appeal and expand the record, deny a certificate dispense of with contentions are appealability, oral argument adequately and dismiss because presented in the the the appeal. We facts and legal materials before this 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?