US v. Tyrone Harrison


UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case numbers: 3:14-cr-00154-REP-DJN-1, 3:16-cv-00361-REP-DJN Copies to all parties and the district court. [1000089146]. Mailed to: Appellant. [17-6278]

Download PDF
Appeal: 17-6278 Doc: 6 Filed: 05/26/2017 Pg: 1 of 2 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 17-6278 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. TYRONE ANTHONY HARRISON, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. David J. Novak, Magistrate Judge. (3:14-cr-00154-REP-DJN-1; 3:16-cv00361-REP-DJN) Submitted: May 23, 3027 Decided: May 26, 2017 Before KING, AGEE, and WYNN, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Tyrone Anthony Harrison, Appellant Pro Se. Michael Arlen Jagels, Special Assistant United States Attorney, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Appeal: 17-6278 Doc: 6 Filed: 05/26/2017 Pg: 2 of 2 PER CURIAM: Tyrone Anthony Harrison seeks to appeal the magistrate judge’s order denying his motions for default judgment in his pending 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) action. This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 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 v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541, 545-46 (1949). The order Harrison seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. 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 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?