United States v. Tyquavious Jaquan Landrum

Opinion

[DO NOT PUBLISH]

In the

United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit

____________________

No. 24-13964

Non-Argument Calendar

____________________

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus TYQUAVIOS JAQUAN LANDRUM, a.k.a. Tyquarious Jaquan Landrum, a.k.a. Tyquavions Jaquan Landrum,

Defendant-Appellant.

____________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Alabama

USCA11 Case: 24-13964 Document: 18-1 Date Filed: 05/21/2025 Page: 2 of 3

2 Opinion of the Court 24-13964

D.C. Docket No. 2:24-cr-00062-KD-MU-1

____________________

Before JORDAN, LUCK, and KIDD, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:

Upon review of the record and the parties’ responses to the jurisdictional question, we conclude that we lack jurisdiction over this appeal because there is not a final or otherwise appealable judgment . Tyquavios Landrum appeals from the district court’s judgment , which disposed of the count of conviction but not the other counts charged in the indictment. 1 The district court declared a mistrial as to the other counts. That judgment is not final or otherwise immediately appealable because a count for which a defendant has been sentenced is not separate and distinct for purposes of finality where other counts remain unresolved. See 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (providing that the courts of appeals have jurisdiction over “appeals from all final decisions of the district courts”); Flanagan v. United States, 465 U.S. 259, 263 (1984) (noting that, in a criminal case, the final judgment rule “prohibits appellate review until conviction and imposition of sentence”); United States v. Myrie, 776 F.3d 1280, 1285 (11th Cir. 2015) (dismissing for lack of jurisdiction where

1 Although Landrum filed his notice of appeal after the jury’s verdict but be-

fore sentencing, the notice of appeal is effective to appeal the later entered judgment. See United States v. Curry, 760 F.2d 1079, 1079-80 (11th Cir. 1985).

3

24-13964 Opinion of the Court 3

sentence was imposed on some counts but other counts were pending after the grant of a motion for new trial).

Accordingly, this appeal is DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction . All pending motions are DENIED as moot.