Judgment — U.S. v. David Staveley (Dkt. 134, D.R.I.)

Record facts

Full text

Text recognized from a scanned document; may contain errors.

Case 1:20-cr-00074-WES-LDA Document134_ Filed 01/04/24 Page 1 of 2 PagelD #:
1250

United States Court of Appeals
For the First Circuit

No. 22-1969
DAVID STAVELEY,
Petitioner - Appellant,
UNITED STATES,

Respondent - Appellee.

Before

Gelpi, Selya and Thompson,
Circuit Judges.

JUDGMENT

Entered: January 3, 2024

Defendant-appellant David A. Staveley filed a notice of appeal in the underlying 28 U.S.C.
§ 2255 proceeding, purporting to challenge an order "den[ying] a Certificate of Appealability" and
a "judgment entered" December 2, 2022. After the appeal was opened, this court entered an order
directing Staveley to show cause why this appeal should not be dismissed for lack of finality,
where it did not appear that a final judgment had entered or that the appeal properly could proceed
on an interlocutory basis. Staveley filed two supplements responding to the court's order to show
cause, as well as two motions to appoint counsel and other motions.

As an initial matter, Staveley's requests for appointment of counsel is denied. See Bucci v.
United States, 662 F.3d 18, 34 (1st Cir. 2011) ("[P]etitioners have no constitutional right to counsel
in [habeas corpus] proceedings."). Having carefully considered Staveley's responses to the court's
order to show cause and relevant portions of the record, we conclude that dismissal is in order. See
generally 28 U.S.C. §§ 1291 & 1292 (statutory finality principles); see also Fabrica de Muebles
J.J. Alvarez, Incorporado v. Inversiones Mendoza, Inc., 682 F.3d 26, 32 (1st Cir. 2012) ("The party
asserting jurisdiction has the burden of demonstrating the existence of federal jurisdiction.").
Case 1:20-cr-00074-WES-LDA Document134_ Filed 01/04/24 Page 2 of 2 PagelD #:
1251

Accordingly, the appeal is hereby dismissed. See Ist Cir. R. 27.0(c) (court may dismiss at
any time when appellate jurisdiction is lacking). Any remaining pending motions, to the extent not
mooted by the foregoing, are denied.

By the Court:

Maria R. Hamilton, Clerk

cc:
David Staveley

Lee H. Vilker
Terrence P. Donnelly
Lauren S. Zurier


File and source

File

gov.uscourts.rid.49679.134.0.pdf

Size

170,251 bytes

SHA-256

314865b464335643f0d4f061a4ef2622e0e0a1104b7f07f02751545d97034485

Our copy

gov.uscourts.rid.49679.134.0.pdf

Original

PACER (login required)