Filed: Aug. 30, 1999
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 99-50281 Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus KEITH RUSSELL JUDD, Defendant-Appellant. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. MO-95-M-91-1 - August 27, 1999 Before KING, Chief Judge, and JOLLY and DAVIS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Keith Russell Judd appeals the district court’s April 1996 order dismissing, without prejudice, a criminal complaint
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 99-50281 Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus KEITH RUSSELL JUDD, Defendant-Appellant. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. MO-95-M-91-1 - August 27, 1999 Before KING, Chief Judge, and JOLLY and DAVIS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Keith Russell Judd appeals the district court’s April 1996 order dismissing, without prejudice, a criminal complaint ..
More
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 99-50281
Conference Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
KEITH RUSSELL JUDD,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas
USDC No. MO-95-M-91-1
--------------------
August 27, 1999
Before KING, Chief Judge, and JOLLY and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Keith Russell Judd appeals the district court’s April 1996
order dismissing, without prejudice, a criminal complaint against
him for causing a threatening communication to be delivered to a
post office or authorized mail depository. We lack jurisdiction
over this appeal. See United States v. Welborn, 849 F.2d 980,
984 n.3 (5th Cir. 1988); see also United States v. Jackson,
30
F.3d 572, 574 (5th Cir. 1994).
APPEAL DISMISSED FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION
*
Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined
that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent
except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.
R. 47.5.4.
