Court Opinion

ID: 9942699
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-02-21 19:01:13.668686+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:48:28.585850
License: Public Domain

Case: 23-50797           Document: 46-1         Page: 1      Date Filed: 02/21/2024

          United States Court of Appeals
               for the Fifth Circuit
                                  ____________
                                                                            United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                     Fifth Circuit
                                    No. 23-50797
                                  ____________                                     FILED
                                                                            February 21, 2024
United States of America,                                                     Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                                   Clerk
                                                                   Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                         versus

Gavin Blake Davis,

                                           Defendant—Appellant.
                  ______________________________

                  Appeal from the United States District Court
                       for the Western District of Texas
                           USDC No. 5:22-CR-219-1
                  ______________________________

Before Clement, Engelhardt, and Ramirez, Circuit Judges.
Per Curiam: *
      Gavin Blake Davis has filed an interlocutory notice of appeal from an
order of the magistrate judge denying his motion to appoint new stand-by
counsel and denying appointed counsel’s motion to withdraw. He moves in
this court for the appointment of counsel.
      “This court must examine the basis of its jurisdiction, on its own
motion, if necessary.” Mosley v. Cozby, 813 F.2d 659, 660 (5th Cir. 1987). A

      _____________________
      *
          This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.
Case: 23-50797        Document: 46-1       Page: 2     Date Filed: 02/21/2024

                                  No. 23-50797

district court judge may reconsider a magistrate judge’s order on pretrial
matters “where it has been shown that the magistrate judge’s order is clearly
erroneous or contrary to law.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A). Under the Federal
Rules of Criminal Procedure, a party generally has 14 days to object to the
magistrate judge’s ruling and waives his right to review if he fails to object.
Fed. R. Crim. P. 59(a). We lack jurisdiction to address an appeal from a
ruling by a magistrate judge acting under § 636(b)(1)(A) where the defendant
did not file timely objections to the ruling with the district court. See United
States v. Renfro, 620 F.2d 497, 500 (5th Cir. 1980).
       In this case, the record shows that Davis failed to file objections with
the district court to the magistrate judge’s order. Therefore, we lack
jurisdiction. Because we lack jurisdiction, we also deny Davis’s pending
motion for appointment of counsel in this court.
       APPEAL DISMISSED; MOTION DENIED.

                                       2