United States v. Michael Gorbey ( 2023 )


Menu:
  • USCA4 Appeal: 22-6393      Doc: 14         Filed: 07/17/2023     Pg: 1 of 2
    UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 22-6393
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    v.
    MICHAEL GORBEY,
    Defendant - Appellant.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at
    Beckley. Joseph R. Goodwin, District Judge. (5:21-cr-00214-1)
    Submitted: July 10, 2023                                          Decided: July 17, 2023
    Before KING, AGEE, and RICHARDSON, Circuit Judges.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Michael S. Gorbey, Appellant Pro Se.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    USCA4 Appeal: 22-6393      Doc: 14         Filed: 07/17/2023     Pg: 2 of 2
    PER CURIAM:
    Michael Gorbey seeks to appeal the district court’s order granting the Government
    leave of court to dismiss the indictment without prejudice pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P.
    48(a). We may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 
    28 U.S.C. § 1291
    , and certain
    interlocutory and collateral orders, 
    28 U.S.C. § 1292
    . “This final judgment rule requires
    ‘that a party must ordinarily raise all claims of error in a single appeal following final
    judgment on the merits.’” Flanagan v. United States, 
    465 U.S. 259
    , 263 (1984). “In a
    criminal case the rule prohibits appellate review until conviction and imposition of
    sentence.” Id.; see also United States v. Sueiro, 
    946 F.3d 637
    , 639 (4th Cir. 2020).
    The order that Gorbey seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an appealable
    interlocutory or collateral order. See Parr v. United States, 
    351 U.S. 513
    , 518-21 (1956);
    United States v. Under Seal, 
    853 F.3d 706
    , 717 (4th Cir. 2017). Accordingly, we dismiss
    the appeal for lack of jurisdiction, and we deny the pending motions as moot. 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
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 22-6393

Filed Date: 7/17/2023

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 7/18/2023