Walkup v. Haines ( 2006 )


Menu:
  •                             UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 05-7627
    HARRY E. WALKUP, JR.,
    Petitioner - Appellant,
    versus
    WILLIAM HAINES, Warden,
    Respondent - Appellee.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern
    District of West Virginia, at Beckley.  David A. Faber, Chief
    District Judge. (CA-04-1283)
    Submitted: February 23, 2006                   Decided: March 3, 2006
    Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and KING, Circuit Judges.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Harry E. Walkup, Jr., Appellant Pro Se.     Dawn Ellen Warfield,
    OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WEST VIRGINIA, Charleston, West
    Virginia, for Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    See Local Rule 36(c).
    PER CURIAM:
    Harry E. Walkup, Jr., filed a 
    28 U.S.C. § 2254
     (2000)
    petition challenging his West Virginia state court convictions. He
    seeks to appeal the district court’s order adopting the magistrate
    judge’s   recommendation   and   denying   Walkup’s   motion   to   excuse
    exhaustion of state court remedies, granting Respondent’s motion to
    dismiss with respect to Walkup’s motion to excuse exhaustion, and
    giving Walkup twenty days to file an amended § 2254 petition
    containing only exhausted claims or to withdraw his § 2254 petition
    in its entirety.*   This court may exercise jurisdiction only over
    final orders, 
    28 U.S.C. § 1291
     (2000), and certain interlocutory
    and collateral orders, 
    28 U.S.C. § 1292
     (2000); Fed. R. Civ. P.
    54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp., 
    337 U.S. 541
     (1949).
    The order Walkup seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an
    appealable interlocutory or collateral order.          Accordingly, we
    dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. 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
    *
    The district court entered its order on September 30, 2005.
    Walkup has neither filed an amended § 2254 petition nor withdrawn
    his § 2254 petition, and no final order has been issued.
    - 2 -
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 05-7627

Judges: Widener, Niemeyer, King

Filed Date: 3/3/2006

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/5/2024