Filed: May 07, 2009
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-6721 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. RONALD T. MASKO, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Wheeling. Frederick P. Stamp, Jr., Senior District Judge. (5:99-cr-00013-FPS-JES-2) Submitted: January 30, 2009 Decided: May 7, 2009 Before NIEMEYER, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Ronald T.
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-6721 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. RONALD T. MASKO, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Wheeling. Frederick P. Stamp, Jr., Senior District Judge. (5:99-cr-00013-FPS-JES-2) Submitted: January 30, 2009 Decided: May 7, 2009 Before NIEMEYER, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Ronald T. ..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 08-6721
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
RONALD T. MASKO,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern
District of West Virginia, at Wheeling. Frederick P. Stamp,
Jr., Senior District Judge. (5:99-cr-00013-FPS-JES-2)
Submitted: January 30, 2009 Decided: May 7, 2009
Before NIEMEYER, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Ronald T. Masko, Appellant Pro Se. Robert Hugh McWilliams, Jr.,
Assistant United States Attorney, Wheeling, West Virginia, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Ronald T. Masko seeks to appeal the district court’s
order denying his motion to reduce sentence as premature and
without prejudice and denying his motion to appoint counsel.
The court has since resumed proceedings and appointed counsel.
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 (1949). The order
Masko seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an appealable
interlocutory or collateral order. Accordingly, we dismiss the
portion of the appeal denying Masko’s motion to appoint counsel
as moot and dismiss the remainder of the appeal for lack of
jurisdiction. We deny Masko’s motion for 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
2