Azeez v. Keller

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
• Decided: January 25, 2011
• Docket: 17-1632
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 10-1515

JAMAL A. AZEEZ,

Plaintiff – Appellant,

v.

KRISTEN L. KELLER, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney; LAWRENCE FRAIL, Chief Prosecuting Attorney; BRUCE K. LAZENBY, Former Prosecuting Attorney; FRANCIS M. CURNUTTE, III, Attorney at Law; CEDRIC ROBERTSON, Police Officer; DAVID H. COOK, Police Officer; BILLY COLE, Chief of Police; JOHN HUTCHINSON, County Judge; JANICE B. DAVIS, Clerk of Court,

Defendants – Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Beckley. Irene C. Berger, District Judge. (5:06-cv-00106)

Submitted: December 1, 2010 Decided: January 25, 2011

Before WILKINSON, DUNCAN, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Jamal A. Azeez, Appellant Pro Se. Kevin John Robinson, Chip E. Williams, PULLIN, FOWLER, FLANAGAN, BROWN & POE, PLLC, Beckley, West Virginia; Francis M. Curnutte, III, FARMER, CLINE & CAMPBELL, PLLC, Charleston, West Virginia; John Michael Hedges, Teresa Jean Lyons, BYRNE, HEDGES & LYONS, Morgantown, West Virginia, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

2 PER CURIAM:

Jamal A. Azeez seeks to appeal the district court’s

order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and

denying his motion for expungement of criminal records. This

court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28

U.S.C. § 1291 (2006), and certain interlocutory and collateral

orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (2006); Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v.

Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541, 545-46 (1949). The

order Azeez seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an

appealable interlocutory or collateral order. Accordingly, we

dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. We deny Azeez’s

motions to expedite and 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