Filed: Feb. 15, 2011
Latest Update: Feb. 21, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-7288 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. ALISON LEVON BOYD, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Durham. Malcolm J. Howard, Senior District Judge. (1:08-cr-00493-MJH-1) Submitted: January 20, 2011 Decided: February 15, 2011 Before MOTZ, KING, and WYNN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed in part; dismissed in part by unpublished per curiam opin
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-7288 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. ALISON LEVON BOYD, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Durham. Malcolm J. Howard, Senior District Judge. (1:08-cr-00493-MJH-1) Submitted: January 20, 2011 Decided: February 15, 2011 Before MOTZ, KING, and WYNN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed in part; dismissed in part by unpublished per curiam opini..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 10-7288
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
ALISON LEVON BOYD,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle
District of North Carolina, at Durham. Malcolm J. Howard,
Senior District Judge. (1:08-cr-00493-MJH-1)
Submitted: January 20, 2011 Decided: February 15, 2011
Before MOTZ, KING, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed in part; dismissed in part by unpublished per curiam
opinion.
Alison Levon Boyd, Appellant Pro Se. Randall Stuart Galyon,
OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Greensboro, North
Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
By notice filed September 14, 2010, Alison Levon Boyd
appeals the district court’s four pre-judgment orders entered on
April 19, 2010. With regard to the order denying the motion for
the return of property submitted under Fed. R. Crim. P. 41(e),
we conclude we have jurisdiction and affirm for the reasons
cited by the district court. United States v. Boyd, No. 1:08-
cr-00493-MJH-1 (M.D.N.C. Apr. 19, 2010). Because no appealable
final judgment was entered when Boyd filed his notice of appeal
and because a second notice of appeal has since been filed from
the final judgment, we dismiss the appeal from the remaining
orders. See United States v. Pardee,
356 F.2d 982 (4th Cir.
1966). The appeal from the final judgment is sufficient to
raise every question arising from the proceedings below. We
deny as moot Boyd’s motions for appointment of counsel and for
transcripts. 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.
AFFIRMED IN PART;
DISMISSED IN PART
2