United States v. Larson ( 2005 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 05-6506
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
JEFFREY ALLEN LARSON,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Liam O’Grady, Magistrate
Judge. (CR-03-286; CA-05-241)
Submitted: September 28, 2005 Decided: October 27, 2005
Before NIEMEYER and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Jeffrey Allen Larson, Appellant Pro Se. John P. McAdams, OFFICE OF
THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Jeffrey Allen Larson appeals a magistrate judge’s order
dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion. This court may
exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291(2000), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C.
§ 1292 (2000). See Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial
Indus. Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541 (1949). The magistrate judge’s
order is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or
collateral order. United States v. Bryson, 981 F.2d 720, 723 (4th
Cir. 1992) (magistrate judge may hear matters in § 2255
proceedings, but may not decide them absent explicit consent).
Moreover, where a dispositive matter is referred to the magistrate
judge under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) (2000), parties must have the
opportunity to object, and the district court is required to
conduct de novo review of the portions of the recommendation to
which objections are made. Bryson, 981 F.2d at 723. 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
- 2 -