JERRY L. WASHINGTON, PETITIONER-APPELLANT,
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, RESPONDENT-APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court held that a magistrate's order denying motions to vacate sentence, without district court review or referral, is not a final judgment and thus not appealable.
Defendant pleaded guilty to a minor offense and was sentenced, with probation. His probation was revoked twice, leading to further sanctions. He filed…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse 28 U.S.C. § 1291 cases and more on FLexlaw
[*1349] PER CURIAM:
Jerry Washington consented to trial before a U.S. Magistrate on the minor offense of obstructing the U.S. Mail, a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1701. He pleaded guilty, was convicted, and was sentenced to serve six months. The execution of the prison sentence was suspended, and Washington was placed on probation for 18 months. He was also fined $100.
Several months later Washington was adjudged in violation of the terms of his probation, and probation was revoked. He was ordered to serve 60 days in prison, make restitution to the government for transporting him from Los Angeles, California, to the district court in Atlanta, Georgia. The magistrate also ordered that the period of probation be extended for two years.
Washington again violated the terms of probation, and he was again ordered to serve part of his prison term. He was again ordered to make restitution to the government for transportation expenses. Shortly after the second probation revocation Washington filed two motions to vacate sentence. 28 U.S.C. § 2255, attacking both probation revocations. The magistrate acted on the motions and issued findings of fact and conclusions of law in which the motions were denied. The district court clerk entered judgment on the magistrate’s order, and Washington filed a notice of appeal. The record does not indicate that a district judge at any time referred the § 2255 motions to the magistrate or reviewed the findings and conclusions. According to the record, no district judge has acted in the premises at all.
The order rendered in this ease by the magistrate is not a final judgment of the district court which would invoke jurisdiction of this Court. 28 U.S.C. § 1291. Nor is the order appealable under any other statute. This Court has no jurisdiction. The appeal is dismissed. United States v. Cline, 566 F. 2d 1220 (5th Cir., 1978).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Cason v. Owen, 578 F.2d 572 (5th Cir. 1978)
Authorities Cited
- Isbell Enters., Inc. v. Citizens Cas. Co. OF NEW York, 431 F.2d 409 (5th Cir. 1970)
- United States & Charles T. Wilson v. Frederic G. Cline & First Bank of Clayton Cnty., 566 F.2d 1220 (5th Cir. 1978)