Filed: May 27, 2010
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-6076 KENNETH EDWARD BARBOUR, Petitioner – Appellant, v. GENE M. JOHNSON, Director of the Virginia Department of Corrections, Respondent – Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. F. Bradford Stillman, Magistrate Judge. (2:09-cv-00302-MSD-FBS) Submitted: May 20, 2010 Decided: May 27, 2010 Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpubl
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-6076 KENNETH EDWARD BARBOUR, Petitioner – Appellant, v. GENE M. JOHNSON, Director of the Virginia Department of Corrections, Respondent – Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. F. Bradford Stillman, Magistrate Judge. (2:09-cv-00302-MSD-FBS) Submitted: May 20, 2010 Decided: May 27, 2010 Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpubli..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 10-6076
KENNETH EDWARD BARBOUR,
Petitioner – Appellant,
v.
GENE M. JOHNSON, Director of the Virginia Department of
Corrections,
Respondent – Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Norfolk. F. Bradford Stillman,
Magistrate Judge. (2:09-cv-00302-MSD-FBS)
Submitted: May 20, 2010 Decided: May 27, 2010
Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Kenneth Edward Barbour, Appellant Pro Se. Benjamin Hyman Katz,
Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Kenneth Edward Barbour seeks to appeal the magistrate
judge’s order directing the Respondent to answer his 28 U.S.C.
§ 2254 (2006) petition. This court may exercise jurisdiction
only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (2006), and certain
interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (2006);
Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp.,
337 U.S. 541 (1949). The order Barbour seeks to appeal is
neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or
collateral order. Accordingly, we deny what we construe as a
motion to expedite a decision in this appeal and 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
2