Court Opinion

ID: 9409630
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-07-18 21:00:32.181708+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:20:52.318398
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 22-6393      Doc: 14         Filed: 07/17/2023     Pg: 1 of 2

                                             UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                               No. 22-6393

        UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                             Plaintiff - Appellee,

                      v.

        MICHAEL GORBEY,

                             Defendant - Appellant.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at
        Beckley. Joseph R. Goodwin, District Judge. (5:21-cr-00214-1)

        Submitted: July 10, 2023                                          Decided: July 17, 2023

        Before KING, AGEE, and RICHARDSON, Circuit Judges.

        Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        Michael S. Gorbey, Appellant Pro Se.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 22-6393      Doc: 14         Filed: 07/17/2023     Pg: 2 of 2

        PER CURIAM:

               Michael Gorbey seeks to appeal the district court’s order granting the Government

        leave of court to dismiss the indictment without prejudice pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P.

        48(a). We may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and certain

        interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292. “This final judgment rule requires

        ‘that a party must ordinarily raise all claims of error in a single appeal following final

        judgment on the merits.’” Flanagan v. United States, 465 U.S. 259, 263 (1984). “In a

        criminal case the rule prohibits appellate review until conviction and imposition of

        sentence.” Id.; see also United States v. Sueiro, 946 F.3d 637, 639 (4th Cir. 2020).

               The order that Gorbey seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an appealable

        interlocutory or collateral order. See Parr v. United States, 351 U.S. 513, 518-21 (1956);

        United States v. Under Seal, 853 F.3d 706, 717 (4th Cir. 2017). Accordingly, we dismiss

        the appeal for lack of jurisdiction, and we deny the pending motions as moot. 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

                                                     2