United States v. Toney, 17-cr-20184-07. (2019)
Court: District Court, E.D. Michigan
Number: infdco20190724b44
Visitors: 17
Filed: Jul. 23, 2019
Latest Update: Jul. 23, 2019
Summary: ORDER GRANTING MOTIONS TO DISMISS COUNT TEN [286, 338] AND DENYING DEFENDANT'S REQUEST [344] JUDITH E. LEVY , District Judge . Defendant James Bowens filed a motion to dismiss Count Ten of the Third Superseding Indictment in light of the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in United States v. Davis, 588 U.S. ___ (2019). (ECF No. 286.) In response, the government has also moved to dismiss Count Ten of the Third Superseding Indictment. (ECF No. 338.) Accordingly, the motions are GRANTED, and C
Summary: ORDER GRANTING MOTIONS TO DISMISS COUNT TEN [286, 338] AND DENYING DEFENDANT'S REQUEST [344] JUDITH E. LEVY , District Judge . Defendant James Bowens filed a motion to dismiss Count Ten of the Third Superseding Indictment in light of the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in United States v. Davis, 588 U.S. ___ (2019). (ECF No. 286.) In response, the government has also moved to dismiss Count Ten of the Third Superseding Indictment. (ECF No. 338.) Accordingly, the motions are GRANTED, and Co..
More
ORDER GRANTING MOTIONS TO DISMISS COUNT TEN [286, 338] AND DENYING DEFENDANT'S REQUEST [344]
JUDITH E. LEVY, District Judge.
Defendant James Bowens filed a motion to dismiss Count Ten of the Third Superseding Indictment in light of the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in United States v. Davis, 588 U.S. ___ (2019). (ECF No. 286.) In response, the government has also moved to dismiss Count Ten of the Third Superseding Indictment. (ECF No. 338.) Accordingly, the motions are GRANTED, and Count Ten of the Third Superseding Indictment is DISMISSED.
Defendant also recently filed a request that the Court transmit various materials to the Sixth Circuit (ECF No. 344), presumably this is related to a notice of appeal he filed in May 2019 (ECF No. 271). There is no appealable order in this case, and therefore jurisdiction remains with this Court and not with the Sixth Circuit. See 28 U.S.C. § 1291; see also United States v. Andrews, 857 F.3d 734, 741 (6th Cir. 2017) ("As a general rule, a pretrial order denying a defendant's motion to dismiss an indictment is not an appealable final decision under [28 U.S.C. § 1291]." (alterations in original) (internal quotations omitted)). Defendant's request (ECF No. 344) is DENIED as premature.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
