Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Edward Lee Bragg v. John B. Metzger, III Virginia Parole Board, 95-6615 (1995)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 95-6615 Visitors: 12
Filed: Jun. 29, 1995
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: 60 F.3d 820 NOTICE: Fourth Circuit Local Rule 36(c) states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit. Edward Lee BRAGG, Petitioner-Appellant, v. John B. METZGER, III; Virginia Parole Board, Respondents-Appellees. No. 95-6615. United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit. Submitted: May 18, 1995. Decided: June 29, 1995. Edwar
More

60 F.3d 820
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit Local Rule 36(c) states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.

Edward Lee BRAGG, Petitioner--Appellant,
v.
John B. METZGER, III; Virginia Parole Board, Respondents--Appellees.

No. 95-6615.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: May 18, 1995.
Decided: June 29, 1995.

Edward Lee Bragg, Appellant Pro Se. Mary Elizabeth Shea, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, VA, for Appellees.

W.D.Va.

AFFIRMED.

Before NIEMEYER and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge.

PER CURIAM:

1

Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying his request for discovery in his 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2254 (1988) proceeding. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the order is not appealable. This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1291 (1988), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1292 (1988); 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. Therefore, we deny a certificate of probable cause to appeal and 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.

2

DISMISSED.

Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer