Enriquez v. Lumpkin

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
• Decided: May 11, 2022
• Docket: 20-20554
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

Case: 20-20554 Document: 00516315097 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/11/2022

United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit

FILED No. 20-20554 May 11, 2022 Summary Calendar Lyle W. Cayce Clerk

Juan Enriquez,

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. 4:20-CV-2895

Before Stewart, Haynes, and Ho, Circuit Judges. Per Curiam:* Juan Enriquez, Texas prisoner # 227122, seeks leave to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP) on appeal to challenge the district court’s transfer of his pro se motion for leave to file a 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition for writ of habeas

* Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Circuit Rule 47.5.4.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: 20-20554 Document: 00516315097 Page: 2 Date Filed: 05/11/2022

No. 20-20554

corpus. The transfer order is not an appealable final judgment under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 or a certified appealable interlocutory order under 28 U.S.C. § 1292. See Persyn v. United States, 935 F.2d 69, 72 (5th Cir. 1991). Likewise, it is not appealable under the collateral order doctrine. See id. at 72-73. We therefore lack appellate jurisdiction. See id. at 73. Accordingly, the appeal is DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction, and Enriquez’s IFP motion is DENIED. His remaining pending motions are also DENIED. Enriquez is WARNED that the filing of frivolous, repetitive, or otherwise abusive challenges to his conviction or confinement will invite the imposition of sanctions, which can include dismissal, monetary sanctions, and restrictions on his ability to file pleadings in this court and any court subject to this court’s jurisdiction. The court further reminds Enriquez that until the $300 sanction recently imposed in Enriquez v. Lumpkin, No. 20- 50904, is paid, he is barred from filing any pro se pleading or appeal in any court subject to this court’s jurisdiction without the advance written permission of a judge of the forum court.