Court Opinion

ID: 9892184
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-10-20 20:01:39.479374+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:50:02.710572
License: Public Domain

USCA11 Case: 23-13010 Document: 7-2 Date Filed: 10/20/2023 Page: 1 of 2

In the
United States Court of Appeals

For the Eleventh Circuit

No. 23-13010

PAUL CHANCELLOR MARTINEAU,
Petitioner-Appellant,

Versus

BREVARD COUNTY JAIL WARDEN,

Respondent-Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Middle District of Florida
D.C. Docket No. 6:23-cv-01391-ACC-EJK

USCA11 Case: 23-13010 Document: 7-2 Date Filed: 10/20/2023 Page: 2 of 2

2 Order of the Court 23-13010

Before WILSON, JORDAN, and GRANT, Circuit Judges.
BY THE COURT:

This appeal is DISMISSED IN PART, sua sponte, for lack of
jurisdiction. Paul Martineau appeals an August 28, 2023 magistrate
judge order striking his motion to disclose criminal bonds. We lack
jurisdiction to directly review magistrate judge orders, as an appeal
from such an order must be taken to the district court. See United
States v. Schultz, 565 F.3d 1353, 1359 (11th Cir, 2009). Furthermore,
even if the district court ultimately affirms the order, the subse-
quent affirmance would not cure the premature notice of appeal.
See Perez-Priego v. Alachua Cnty. Clerk of Ct., 148 F.3d 1272, 1273
(11th Cir. 1998). However, we also construe the pro se notice of
appeal as challenging the district judge’s August 16, 2023 order
denying Martineau’s 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition.

Accordingly, Martineau’s appeal is dismissed to the extent
that he challenges the August 28, 2023 magistrate judge order and
may proceed only as to his challenge to the district judge’s August
16, 2023 order. No motion for reconsideration may be filed unless
it complies with the timing and other requirements of 11th Cir. R.
27-2 and all other applicable rules.