Filed: Jun. 19, 2018
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 17-7538 JACKIE EMMITT MOOREHEAD, Petitioner - Appellant, v. STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Robert T. Numbers, II, Magistrate Judge. (5:17-hc-02086-D) Submitted: June 6, 2018 Decided: June 19, 2018 Before DUNCAN and AGEE, Circuit Judges, and SHEDD, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinio
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 17-7538 JACKIE EMMITT MOOREHEAD, Petitioner - Appellant, v. STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Robert T. Numbers, II, Magistrate Judge. (5:17-hc-02086-D) Submitted: June 6, 2018 Decided: June 19, 2018 Before DUNCAN and AGEE, Circuit Judges, and SHEDD, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 17-7538
JACKIE EMMITT MOOREHEAD,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA,
Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at
Raleigh. Robert T. Numbers, II, Magistrate Judge. (5:17-hc-02086-D)
Submitted: June 6, 2018 Decided: June 19, 2018
Before DUNCAN and AGEE, Circuit Judges, and SHEDD, Senior Circuit Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Jackie Emmitt Moorehead, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Jackie Emmitt Moorehead seeks to appeal the magistrate judge’s report and
recommendation construing Moorehead’s 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2012) petition as a
successive and unauthorized 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2012) petition and recommending that the
petition be dismissed without prejudice on that basis. This court may exercise
jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (2012), and certain interlocutory and
collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (2012); Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial
Indus. Loan Corp.,
337 U.S. 541, 545-46 (1949). The magistrate judge’s report and
recommendation 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 this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED
2