The AI workspace for legal professionals
- Legal research with access to more than 1 million sources
- Document automation
- Matter management
- Hosted in the EU and Switzerland
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
The AI workspace for legal professionals
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
03-30822•United States v. Britton
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined
that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent
except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.
R. 47.5.4.
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
March 3, 2004
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 03-30822
Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
PATRICK CARLOS BRITTON,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Louisiana
USDC Nos. 00-CV-627 &
96-CR-49-2-C
--------------------
Before REAVLEY, STEWART, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Patrick Carlos Britton, federal prisoner number 24975-034,
was convicted of conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute
cocaine and was sentenced to 121 months of imprisonment. Britton
seeks a certificate of appealability (COA) to appeal the district
court’s order transferring his successive 28 U.S.C. § 2255
application to this court.
We must examine the basis of our jurisdiction sua sponte
if necessary. Mosley v. Cozby, 813 F.2d 659, 660 (5th Cir.
-- 1 of 2 --
No. 03-30822
-2-
1987). An order transferring a successive 28 U.S.C. § 2255
application to the court of appeals is a non-appealable
interlocutory order. See Brinar v. Williamson, 245 F.3d 515,
516-18 (5th Cir. 2001). This court is without jurisdiction to
consider Britton’s appeal. Accordingly, Britton’s motion for a
COA is DENIED, and the appeal is DISMISSED for lack of
jurisdiction.
MOTION DENIED; APPEAL DISMISSED.
-- 2 of 2 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.