United States v. Andre Twitty

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
• Decided: April 1, 2026
• Docket: 25-13433
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

USCA11 Case: 25-13433 Document: 8-1 Date Filed: 04/01/2026 Page: 1 of 2

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

In the United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit ____________________ No. 25-13433 Non-Argument Calendar ____________________

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus

ANDRE J. TWITTY, Defendant-Appellant. ____________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Georgia D.C. Docket No. 2:24-cr-00005-LGW-BWC-1 ____________________

Before ROSENBAUM, NEWSOM, and LUCK, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: Andre Twitty, a criminal defendant proceeding pro se, ap- peals from the district court’s September 18, 2025 order denying his USCA11 Case: 25-13433 Document: 8-1 Date Filed: 04/01/2026 Page: 2 of 2

2 Opinion of the Court 25-13433

motion to dismiss the count in his indictment brought under 18 U.S.C. § 115(a)(1)(B). We lack jurisdiction over Twitty’s appeal because the dis- trict court’s denial is not final or otherwise appealable. First, the denial is not final because Twitty has not been sentenced on any count and, thus, there is not a final judgment. See 28 U.S.C. § 1291; Flanagan v. United States, 465 U.S. 259, 263-64 (1984) (explaining that appellate review is generally prohibited in a criminal case until the defendant has been convicted and sentenced). Second, the order is not appealable under the collateral order doctrine, as Twitty may effectively challenge the order on appeal from a final judgment. See United States v. Shalhoub, 855 F.3d 1255, 1260 (11th Cir. 2017); Rich- ardson-Merrell, Inc. v. Koller, 472 U.S. 424, 430-31 (1985) (explaining that the doctrine applies to district court orders “affecting rights that will be irretrievably lost in the absence of an immediate ap- peal”). Accordingly, this appeal is DISMISSED, sua sponte, for lack of jurisdiction. All pending motions are DENIED as moot.