Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Michael Coley v. Joseph Hall, 4th Cir. (2014)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    2 views2 pages
    This document summarizes a court case from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. Michael Wayne Coley sought to appeal a magistrate judge's recommendation to deny his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition as untimely. However, the district court had not yet acted on the recommendation. The appeals court dismissed the case for lack of jurisdiction since the order Coley sought to appeal was neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. The court dispensed with oral arguments as the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the materials.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2014-03-05 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 13-7929

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    This document summarizes a court case from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. Michael Wayne Coley sought to appeal a magistrate judge's recommendation to deny his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition as untimely. However, the district court had not yet acted on the recommendation. The appeals court dismissed the case for lack of jurisdiction since the order Coley sought to appeal was neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. The court dispensed with oral arguments as the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the materials.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    2 views2 pages

    Michael Coley v. Joseph Hall, 4th Cir. (2014)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document summarizes a court case from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. Michael Wayne Coley sought to appeal a magistrate judge's recommendation to deny his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition as untimely. However, the district court had not yet acted on the recommendation. The appeals court dismissed the case for lack of jurisdiction since the order Coley sought to appeal was neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. The court dispensed with oral arguments as the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the materials.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 2

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 13-7929

    MICHAEL WAYNE COLEY,


    Petitioner - Appellant,
    v.
    JOSEPH B. HALL,
    Respondent - Appellee.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle
    District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. James A. Beaty, Jr.,
    District Judge. (1:13-cv-00484-JAB-JLW)

    Submitted:

    February 27, 2014

    Decided:

    March 5, 2014

    Before NIEMEYER, KING, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.

    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Michael Wayne Coley, Appellant Pro Se.


    Clarence Joe DelForge,
    III, NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Raleigh, North
    Carolina, for Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    Michael
    magistrate

    judges

    Wayne

    Coley

    report

    and

    seeks

    to

    appeal

    recommendation

    that

    from

    the

    recommends

    denying as untimely his 28 U.S.C. 2254 (2012) petition.

    The

    district court has not acted on the recommendation.

    This court

    may

    28

    exercise

    jurisdiction

    only

    over

    final

    orders,

    U.S.C.

    1291 (2012), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders,


    28

    U.S.C.

    1292

    (2012);

    Fed.

    R.

    Civ.

    P.

    54(b);

    Cohen

    Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541, 545-46 (1949).

    v.
    The

    order Coley seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an


    appealable interlocutory or collateral order.
    dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.
    oral

    argument

    adequately

    because

    presented

    in

    the
    the

    facts

    and

    materials

    legal
    before

    Accordingly, we
    We dispense with
    contentions
    this

    court

    are
    and

    argument would not aid the decisional process.

    DISMISSED

    You might also like