Smith v. Lumpkin ( 2021 )

Case: 19-20759 Document: 00516114455 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/02/2021
United States Court of Appeals
for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
FILED
No. 19-20759 December 2, 2021
Summary Calendar Lyle W. Cayce
Clerk
Charles Darnell Smith,
Petitioner—Appellant,
versus
Bobby Lumpkin, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice,
Correctional Institutions Division,
Respondent—Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. 4:18-CV-2813
Before Barksdale, Willett, and Duncan, Circuit Judges.
Per Curiam:*
Charles Darnell Smith, Texas prisoner # 1999312, was convicted of:
indecency with a child; and super-aggravated sexual assault of a child.
Proceeding pro se, he challenges, in his opening brief, the validity of his
*
Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this
opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited
circumstances set forth in 5th Circuit Rule 47.5.4.
Case: 19-20759 Document: 00516114455 Page: 2 Date Filed: 12/02/2021
No. 19-20759
convictions; in his reply brief, the denial of his motion for a stay and
abatement of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 proceeding in order to exhaust his state-
court remedies, as well as appointment of counsel. (In his reply brief, he also
requests his appeal be dismissed without prejudice.)
Our court lacks jurisdiction over Smith’s challenge to the district
court’s interlocutory order. See Grace v. Vannoy, 826 F.3d 813, 815–21 (5th
Cir. 2016) (holding court lacked jurisdiction, under the collateral-order
doctrine, to review district court’s order staying § 2254 proceeding pending
exhaustion of state remedies because, inter alia, not sufficiently important
question separate from the merits); Thomas v. Scott, 47 F.3d 713, 715 (5th Cir.
1995) (holding order denying request for appointment of counsel in § 2254
proceeding not appealable under collateral-order doctrine). Smith is advised
he can appeal any adverse ruling on his § 2254 petition after the district court
enters an order and final judgment.
DISMISSED.
2