Court Opinion

ID: 9390130
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-04-26 21:00:53.561985+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:18:31.666088
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 22-7336      Doc: 7        Filed: 04/25/2023     Pg: 1 of 2

                                            UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                              No. 22-7336

        UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                            Plaintiff - Appellee,

                     v.

        RAYMOND EDWARD GILL,

                            Defendant - Appellant.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore.
        George L. Russell, III, District Judge. (1:86-cr-00231-GLR-1)

        Submitted: April 20, 2023                                           Decided: April 25, 2023

        Before KING and QUATTLEBAUM, Circuit Judges, and FLOYD, Senior Circuit Judge.

        Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        Raymond Edward Gill, Appellant Pro Se.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 22-7336         Doc: 7      Filed: 04/25/2023      Pg: 2 of 2

        PER CURIAM:

               Raymond Edward Gill filed a notice of appeal in the underlying criminal action after

        filing multiple motions for a writ of error coram nobis. This court may exercise jurisdiction

        only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28

        U.S.C. § 1292; Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541,

        545-46 (1949). Review of the district court docket confirms that the district court has not

        yet ruled on the pending motions. 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 the court and argument would not aid the

        decisional process.

                                                                                       DISMISSED

                                                     2