FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION APR 15 2015
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 13-10565
Plaintiff - Appellee, D.C. No. 2:12-cr-00324-JAM-1
v.
ORDER*
PHILLIP DALE SELFA,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of California
John A. Mendez, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted April 13, 2015**
San Francisco, California
Before: KOZINSKI and GRABER, Circuit Judges, and PONSOR,*** Senior
District Judge.
Defendant Phillip Selfa was indicted for bank robbery in violation of 18
U.S.C. § 2113(a). He appeals the district court’s denial of his motion to dismiss
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
***
The Honorable Michael A. Ponsor, Senior United States District
Judge for the District of Massachusetts, sitting by designation.
the indictment for vindictive prosecution. We lack jurisdiction to consider his
appeal because the denial of a motion to dismiss an indictment for vindictive
prosecution is neither a "final decision" of the district court under 28 U.S.C. § 1291
nor a collateral order subject to interlocutory review. See United States v.
Hollywood Motor Car Co., 458 U.S. 263, 264–70 (1982) (per curiam) ("We do not
reach the question of prosecutorial vindictiveness, for we hold that the Court of
Appeals was without jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 to review the District
Court’s interlocutory order refusing to dismiss the indictment."); United States v.
McKinley, 38 F.3d 428, 431 (9th Cir. 1994) (dismissing for lack of jurisdiction the
interlocutory appeal of a denial of a motion to dismiss an indictment for
prosecutorial vindictiveness).
DISMISSED.
2