United States v. Muhammad

404 F. App'x 812
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided December 6, 2010·No. 10-6052·Unpublished

Opinion

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Pete Noble Muhammad seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying various motions Muhammad had filed regarding his term of supervised release. In denying Muhammad relief, the district court noted that the issues raised in Muhammad’s motions would be addressed during the course of his then-pending supervised release revocation proceedings. 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, 69 S.Ct. 1221, 93 L.Ed. 1528 (1949). The order Muhammad 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 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.

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

United States v. Muhammad, 404 F. App'x 812 (4th Cir. 2010).

404 F. App'x 812 (United States v. Muhammad) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Cohen v. Beneficial Industrial Loan Corp.
337 U.S. 541 (Supreme Court, 1949)