Opinion
No. 16-1903
01-24-2017
UNITED STATES, Appellee, v. Eduardo ESTERAS-ROSADO, Defendant, Appellant.
Mariana E. Bauza Almonte, Maritza Gonzalez–Rivera, US Attorney's Office, San Juan, PR, for Appellee. Alejandro Jose Cepeda–Diaz, McConnell Valdes LLC, Anita Hill-Adames, Anita Hill Law Office, San Juan, PR, Eduardo Esteras–Rosado, Catano, PR, for Defendant, Appellant.
Mariana E. Bauza Almonte, Maritza Gonzalez–Rivera, US Attorney's Office, San Juan, PR, for Appellee.
Alejandro Jose Cepeda–Diaz, McConnell Valdes LLC, Anita Hill-Adames, Anita Hill Law Office, San Juan, PR, Eduardo Esteras–Rosado, Catano, PR, for Defendant, Appellant.
Before Howard, Chief Judge, Torruella and Thompson, Circuit Judges.
JUDGMENT
Eduardo Esteras-Rosado appeals pro se from the district court's interlocutory order denying his motion to dismiss the criminal indictment based on purported speedy trial violations. We DISMISS the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because such orders are not immediately appealable under these circumstances. 28 U.S.C. §§ 1291, 1292 ; see United States v. Kane, 955 F.2d 110, 110-111 (1st Cir. 1992) (per curiam); United States v. Moller-Butcher, 723 F.2d 189, 190-91 (1st Cir. 1983). Defendant's motion for appointment of counsel is DENIED as moot.
Dismissed.