United States v. Eric Fields ( 2013 )


Menu:
  •                                UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 13-4346
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
    Plaintiff – Appellee,
    v.
    ERIC ANDRE FIELDS,
    Defendant - Appellant.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of North Carolina, at Wilmington.  Robert B. Jones,
    Jr., Magistrate Judge. (7:11-cr-00125-F-4)
    Submitted:   October 3, 2013                 Decided:   October 21, 2013
    Before KING, AGEE, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Eric Andre Fields, Appellant Pro Se. Jennifer P. May-Parker,
    Assistant United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for
    Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    PER CURIAM:
    Eric    Andre    Fields     appeals       the   district       court’s
    pretrial detention order in his criminal case.                      The issue of
    pretrial detention is moot after a conviction.                      See Murphy v.
    Hunt,   
    455 U.S. 478
    ,   481-82    (1982)    (finding,    in    civil    action
    seeking declaratory and injunctive relief related to denial of
    pretrial bail, that civil plaintiff’s “claim to pretrial bail
    was moot once he was convicted”).                Because Fields was convicted
    long before this appeal was docketed, we lack jurisdiction to
    address his challenge to his pretrial detention.
    Fields also moves, pro se, for release pending the
    resolution of his appeal of the underlying criminal judgment,
    pending in No. 12-4724.             A defendant seeking release pending
    appeal must first move for such relief in the district court.
    See United States v. Hochevar, 
    214 F.3d 342
    , 343-44 (2d Cir.
    2000) (citing Fed. R. App. P. 9); 4th Cir. R. 9(b).                          Because
    Fields has not moved in the district court for release pending
    appeal, we deny the motion.
    Accordingly,     we   dismiss       the    appeal     for   lack   of
    jurisdiction.         We also deny Fields’ motion for release pending
    appeal, without prejudice to his ability to file such a motion
    in the district court.          We dispense with oral argument because
    the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the
    2
    materials   before   this   court   and   argument   would   not    aid   the
    decisional process.
    DISMISSED
    3
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 13-4346

Judges: King, Agee, Thacker

Filed Date: 10/21/2013

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/6/2024