US v. Andre Roach, No. 21-7579 (4th Cir. 2022)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 21-7579 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. ANDRE RICARDO ROACH, a/k/a Squeaky, a/k/a Redrum, a/k/a Rum, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. George L. Russell, III, District Judge. (1:11-cr-00526-GLR-1) Submitted: June 28, 2022 Decided: June 30, 2022 Before NIEMEYER and HEYTENS, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed and remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion. Andre Ricardo Roach, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Andre Ricardo Roach seeks to appeal the district court’s orders denying his motion seeking a sentence reduction under § 404(b) of the First Step Act of 2018, Pub. L. No. 115-391, 132 Stat. 5194, and denying reconsideration. This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292; Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541, 545-46 (1949). “Ordinarily, a district court order is not final until it has resolved all claims as to all parties.” Porter v. Zook, 803 F.3d 694, 696 (4th Cir. 2015) (internal quotation marks omitted). Our review of the record reveals that the district court did not adjudicate all of the claims raised in the motion. Id. at 696-97. Specifically, the court failed to address Roach’s 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) arguments for a sentence reduction. We conclude that the orders Roach seeks to appeal are neither final orders nor appealable interlocutory or collateral orders. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction and remand to the district court for consideration of the unresolved claim. Id. at 699. We express no view on the merit of any of Roach’s claims. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process. DISMISSED AND REMANDED 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.