Court Opinion

ID: 9400652
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-06-08 19:01:03.21794+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:19:47.094895
License: Public Domain

USCA11 Case: 23-11543   Document: 7-1      Date Filed: 06/08/2023   Page: 1 of 3

                                                  [DO NOT PUBLISH]
                                  In the
               United States Court of Appeals
                        For the Eleventh Circuit

                         ____________________

                               No. 23-11543
                         Non-Argument Calendar
                         ____________________

      RANDY XAVIER JONES,
                                                   Petitioner-Appellant,
      versus
      UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                                 Respondent-Appellee.

                         ____________________

                Appeal from the United States District Court
                     for the Middle District of Florida
                D.C. Docket Nos. 8:21-cr-00288-WFJ-SPF-1,
                          8:23-cv-00844-WFJ-SPF
USCA11 Case: 23-11543      Document: 7-1      Date Filed: 06/08/2023      Page: 2 of 3

      2                       Opinion of the Court                  23-11543

                           ____________________

      Before WILSON, NEWSOM, and LAGOA, Circuit Judges.
      PER CURIAM:
              This appeal is DISMISSED, sua sponte, for lack of jurisdic-
      tion. Randy Jones appeals from the district court’s order ﬁnding
      that his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion was moot as to its ﬁling in his crim-
      inal case because it was docketed, and would be resolved, in a sep-
      arate civil case. That order is not ﬁnal and appealable, however,
      because it did not end the litigation on the merits in the district
      court. See 28 U.S.C. § 1291; Acheron Cap., Ltd. v. Mukamal,
      22 F.4th 979, 986 (11th Cir. 2022) (stating that a ﬁnal order ends the
      litigation on the merits and leaves nothing for the court to do but
      execute its judgment).
              Jones’s § 2255 motion is still pending before the district court
      in the civil case—no. 8:23-cv-844. Further, the district court’s deci-
      sion to consider the § 2255 motion in a separate civil proceeding is
      not appealable under the collateral order doctrine because that de-
      cision can be eﬀectively reviewed on an appeal from a ﬁnal judg-
      ment in that proceeding. See Plaintiﬀ A v. Schair, 744 F.3d 1247,
      1252-53 (11th Cir. 2014) (explaining that a ruling that does not con-
      clude the litigation may be appealed under the collateral order doc-
      trine if it, inter alia, is “eﬀectively unreviewable on appeal from a
      ﬁnal judgment”).
USCA11 Case: 23-11543    Document: 7-1     Date Filed: 06/08/2023    Page: 3 of 3

      23-11543              Opinion of the Court                       3

             No petition for rehearing may be ﬁled unless it complies
      with the timing and other requirements of 11th Cir. R. 40-3 and all
      other applicable rules.