From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

U.S. v. Phillips

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit
Feb 23, 2011
420 F. App'x 269 (4th Cir. 2011)

Opinion

No. 10-7527.

Submitted: February 10, 2011.

Decided: February 23, 2011.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. J. Frederick Motz, Senior District Judge. (1:05-cr-00165-JFM-1).

Mark E. Phillips, Appellant Pro Se. Richard Charles Kay, Allen F. Loucks, Paul M. Tiao, Assistant United States Attorneys, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.

Before WILKINSON and DAVIS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


Mark E. Phillips seeks to appeal the district court's order denying his motion to recuse and denying his motion for assignment of the chief judge or another district court judge to adjudicate recusal. 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, 69 S.Ct. 1221, 93 L.Ed. 1528 (1949). The order Phillips seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. 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.

DISMISSED.


Summaries of

U.S. v. Phillips

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit
Feb 23, 2011
420 F. App'x 269 (4th Cir. 2011)
Case details for

U.S. v. Phillips

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Mark E. PHILLIPS, a/k/a…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit

Date published: Feb 23, 2011

Citations

420 F. App'x 269 (4th Cir. 2011)

Citing Cases

U.S. v. Wilson

To the extent that the Tenth Circuit construes defendant's pending appeal as raising the issue of recusal of…

Teffeau v. Comm'r

It is unclear whether § 1292(a)(1) applies to Tax Court orders, but we need not decide that issue in this…