US v. Edgardo Barron-Espinosa

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 5:13-cr-00259-F-2. Copies to all parties and the district court. [1000128807]. Mailed to: Appellant. [17-6359]

Appeal: 17-6359

Doc: 6

Filed: 08/01/2017

Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 17-6359

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
EDGARDO BARRON-ESPINOSA,
Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at
Raleigh. James C. Fox, Senior District Judge. (5:13-cr-00259-F-2)

Submitted: July 27, 2017

Decided: August 1, 2017

Before AGEE and FLOYD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Edgardo Barron-Espinosa, Appellant Pro Se. Jennifer P. May-Parker, Brian Scott Meyers,
Assistant United States Attorneys, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 17-6359

Doc: 6

Filed: 08/01/2017

Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:
Edgardo Barron-Espinosa seeks to appeal from the district court orders directing
him to raise his postconviction sentencing challenge in the form of a 28 U.S.C. § 2255
(2012) motion and denying his motion for appointment of counsel. 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 orders Barron-Espinosa seeks to appeal are
neither final orders nor appealable interlocutory or collateral orders. 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