UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 09-7740
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
MICHAEL ALONZA RUFUS,
Defendant – Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Columbia. Matthew J. Perry, Jr., Senior
District Judge. (3:02-cr-00550-MJP-1)
Submitted: November 17, 2009 Decided: November 25, 2009
Before WILKINSON, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed in part; affirmed in part by unpublished per curiam
opinion.
Michael Alonza Rufus, Appellant Pro Se. William Kenneth
Witherspoon, Assistant United States Attorney, Columbia, South
Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Michael Alonza Rufus seeks to appeal the district
court’s text order denying his motions for bond, to appoint
counsel, for discovery, and for a hearing. We affirm in part
and dismiss in part.
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
(1949). The portion of the district court’s order that denied
Rufus’ motions to appoint counsel, for discovery, and for a
hearing is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory
or collateral order. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal in part
for lack of jurisdiction.
With regard to the part of the district court’s order
denying Rufus’ motion for bond, we have reviewed the record and
find no reversible error. United States v. Rufus, No. 3:02-cr-
00550-MJP-1 (D.S.C. Aug. 20, 2009). Accordingly, we affirm in
part. We deny Rufus’ motion to place the appeal in abeyance.
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 IN PART;
AFFIRMED IN PART
2