McCoy v. Prado ( 2000 )


Menu:
  •                             UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 99-7588
    FRANKIE L. MCCOY, SR.,
    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    versus
    MARTA PRADO; DOCTOR WAYNE; DORTHY TRIBBLE,
    Admin-Nurse, Individual and Official Capacity;
    LOUISE   STEWARD,  Assistant   Warden;   JAMES
    PEGEUESS, Chief of Security; L. CHANEY, Cap-
    tain; R. MARTIN, Lieutenant; SERGEANT COWAN;
    D. INGRAM, Sergeant; MARLENE SHELBY,
    Defendants - Appellees.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    Maryland, at Baltimore. Benson E. Legg, District Judge. (CA-99-
    1464-L)
    Submitted:   January 13, 2000             Decided:   January 20, 2000
    Before WIDENER, WILKINS, and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Frankie L. McCoy, Sr., Appellant Pro Se. Donald Joseph Crawford,
    GODARD, WEST & ADELMAN, P.C., Rockville, Maryland; John Joseph
    Curran, Jr., Attorney General, Gloria Wilson Shelton, OFFICE OF THE
    ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    See Local Rule 36(c).
    PER CURIAM:
    Frankie L. McCoy, Sr., appeals the district court’s order
    denying his motion for appointment of counsel.   We dismiss the ap-
    peal for lack of jurisdiction because the order is not appealable.
    This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 
    28 U.S.C. § 1291
     (1994), and certain interlocutory and collateral
    orders, 
    28 U.S.C. § 1292
     (1994); Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v.
    Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp., 
    337 U.S. 541
     (1949).   The order here
    appealed is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory
    or collateral order.   See Miller v. Simmons, 
    814 F.2d 962
    , 967 (4th
    Cir. 1987).
    We therefore dismiss the appeal as interlocutory. We dispense
    with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are
    adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument
    would not aid the decisional process.
    DISMISSED
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 99-7588

Filed Date: 1/20/2000

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 10/31/2014