U.S. v. Moore, 89-10222
Decision Date | 03 July 1989 |
Docket Number | No. 89-10222,89-10222 |
Citation | 878 F.2d 331 |
Parties | UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Ernest Bernard MOORE, Defendant-Appellant. |
Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Ninth Circuit |
Ernest Bernard Moore, Pro. Per., Federal Correctional Institution, Terminal Island, Cal., for defendant-appellant.
Rudolfo Orjales, Asst. U.S. Atty., San Francisco, Cal., for plaintiff-appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California; D. Lowell Jensen, District Judge, Presiding.
Before BROWNING, THOMPSON and LEAVY, Circuit Judges.
Ernest Moore appeals a district court order denying his motion to quash a writ of execution.We dismiss for lack of jurisdiction.
On January 23, 1987, Moore pleaded guilty to two counts of fraudulently using credit cards, in violation of 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1029(a)(2).The district court sentenced Moore to eight years in custody and five years of probation.The court also ordered Moore to pay restitution in the amount of $62,864.82 as directed by the Probation Department.The final judgment was entered May 12, 1987.
The United States Attorney's office then obtained a writ of execution and a memorandum of garnishment to collect on the court-ordered restitution.On March 13, 1989, Moore filed a motion to discharge or quash the writ.The district court denied the motion on April 20, 1989.Moore filed a timely notice of appeal from that denial.
In Steccone v. Morse-Starrett Products Co., 191 F.2d 197, 199(9th Cir.1951), this court held that the denial of a motion to quash a writ of execution is not an appealable order.The court noted that the order did not finally dispose of an entire controversy between the parties.Id.In reaching this decision, we relied on Loeber v. Schroeder, 149 U.S. 580, 13 S.Ct. 934, 37 L.Ed. 856(1893)...
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

Start Your 7-day Trial
-
United States v. Swenson
...in the criminal case, including the post-judgment garnishment proceedings. Id. On that basis, we distinguished United States v. Moore , 878 F.2d 331 (9th Cir. 1989), where the appeal involved an interlocutory order denying the defendant's motion to quash a writ of garnishment.2 Id. at 331. ......
-
United States v. Parker
..., 149 U.S. 580, 585, 13 S.Ct. 934, 37 L.Ed. 856 (1893) ). Other circuits have said the same thing. See United States v. Moore , 878 F.2d 331 (9th Cir. 1989) (per curiam); United States v. Stangland , 270 F.2d 893, 894 (7th Cir. 1959). But those cases were all decided prior to the Federal De......
-
Crystallex Int'l Corp. v. Bolivarian Republic of Venez. Citgo Petroleum Corp.
...orders). The few decisions that apply Boyle or Loeber to dismiss appeals are perfunctory. See, e.g., United States v. Moore , 878 F.2d 331, 331 (9th Cir. 1989) (per curiam) (relying on Loeber to dismiss without explanation); Steccone v. Morse-Starrett Prods. Co. , 191 F.2d 197, 199 (9th Cir......
-
U.S. v. Mays
...jurisdiction de novo. See Chang v. United States, 327 F.3d 911, 922 (9th Cir. 2003). The government argues that United States v. Moore, 878 F.2d 331 (9th Cir.1989) (per curiam), deprives us of jurisdiction to hear this appeal. In Moore, we held that we lacked jurisdiction to review a distri......