United States v. Donald Lee Earles

Eighth Circuit

United States v. Donald Lee Earles

Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit·Decided July 1, 1998·No. 97-4091·Unpublished

Opinion

United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT ___________

No. 97-4091 ___________

United States of America, * * Appellee, * * v. * * Donald Lee Earles, * * Appellant,1 * Appeals from the United States _________________________ * District Court for the * Northern District of Iowa. United States of America, * * [UNPUBLISHED] Appellee, * * v. * * Catherine Papajohn, * * Appellant. * __________

Submitted: April 15, 1998 Filed: July 1, 1998 ___________

Before WOLLMAN, BEAM, and MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, Circuit Judges. ___________

1 On May 20, 1998, the appeal of Donald Lee Earles was dismissed for failure to prosecute. PER CURIAM.

In 1995, a jury found Catherine Papajohn guilty of various arson-related offenses. The district court nevertheless entered a judgment of acquittal, and the United States appealed to this court. We reversed and remanded the case for reinstatement of the jury's verdict. United States v. Earles, 113 F.3d 796 (8th Cir. 1997). Papajohn then made a motion before the district court for a new trial based on newly discovered evidence. After holding an evidentiary hearing, the district court denied that motion. Before being sentenced, Papajohn filed this appeal from the district court's denial of her motion for a new trial. Consequently, no judgment of conviction and sentence has yet been entered in accordance with Rule 32(d) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure.

We have jurisdiction to hear appeals only from those orders of the district court which are final. See 28 U.S.C. § 1291. An order denying a motion for a new trial is not final and therefore not appealable to this court. See McGowne v. Challenge-Cook Bros., Inc., 672 F.2d 652, 659 (8th Cir. 1982). Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal for want of jurisdiction. Dismissal is without prejudice to Papajohn's right to pursue a timely appeal following the district court's entry of a judgment of conviction and sentence.

A true copy.

ATTEST:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.

-2-

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT ___________

No. 97-4091 ___________

United States of America, * * Appellee, * * v. * * Donald Lee Earles, * * Appellant,1 * Appeals from the United States _________________________ * District Court for the * Northern District of Iowa. United States of America, * * [UNPUBLISHED] Appellee, * * v. * * Catherine Papajohn, * * Appellant. * __________

Submitted: April 15, 1998 Filed: July 1, 1998 ___________

Before WOLLMAN, BEAM, and MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, Circuit Judges. ___________

1 On May 20, 1998, the appeal of Donald Lee Earles was dismissed for failure to prosecute. PER CURIAM.

In 1995, a jury found Catherine Papajohn guilty of various arson-related offenses. The district court nevertheless entered a judgment of acquittal, and the United States appealed to this court. We reversed and remanded the case for reinstatement of the jury's verdict. United States v. Earles, 113 F.3d 796 (8th Cir. 1997). Papajohn then made a motion before the district court for a new trial based on newly discovered evidence. After holding an evidentiary hearing, the district court denied that motion. Before being sentenced, Papajohn filed this appeal from the district court's denial of her motion for a new trial. Consequently, no judgment of conviction and sentence has yet been entered in accordance with Rule 32(d) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure.

We have jurisdiction to hear appeals only from those orders of the district court which are final. See 28 U.S.C. § 1291. An order denying a motion for a new trial is not final and therefore not appealable to this court. See McGowne v. Challenge-Cook Bros., Inc., 672 F.2d 652, 659 (8th Cir. 1982). Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal for want of jurisdiction. Dismissal is without prejudice to Papajohn's right to pursue a timely appeal following the district court's entry of a judgment of conviction and sentence.

A true copy.

ATTEST:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.

-2-

United States v. Donald Lee Earles, (8th Cir. 1998).

Pincite

United States v. Donald Lee Earles (United States v. Donald Lee Earles) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related