Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Edgardo BARRON-ESPINOSA, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2017-08-01
Citations: 694 F. App'x 156
Docket Number: No. 17-6359
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Edgardo BARRON-ESPINOSA, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before AGEE and FLOYD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 694
Pages: 156–157

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Edgardo BARRON-ESPINOSA, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 17-6359
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: July 27, 2017
Decided: August 1, 2017
Edgardo Barron-Espinosa, Appellant Pro Se. Jennifer P. May-Parker, Brian Scott Meyers, Assistant United States Attorneys, Raléigh, North Carolina, for Ap-pellee.
Before AGEE and FLOYD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Opinion:
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
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, 69 S.Ct. 1221, 93 L.Ed. 1528 (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