McLean v. Angelone

Fourth Circuit

McLean v. Angelone

22 F. App'x 302

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedDecember 21, 2001

DocketNo. 01-7148

StatusPublished

This text of 22 F. App'x 302 (McLean v. Angelone) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

McLean v. Angelone, 22 F. App'x 302 (4th Cir. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Quentin McLean appeals the report and recommendation of the magistrate judge on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 & Supp.2001). We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (1994), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (1994); Fed. R.Civ.P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541, 69 S.Ct. 1221, 93 L.Ed. 1528 (1949). The report and recommendation from which McLean appeals does not constitute an order over which this court may exercise jurisdiction. We therefore deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. McLean’s motions for appointment of counsel, to remand the case, to stay the case, and for general relief are denied. 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.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

Quentin McLean appeals the report and recommendation of the magistrate judge on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 & Supp.2001). We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (1994), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (1994); Fed. R.Civ.P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541, 69 S.Ct. 1221, 93 L.Ed. 1528 (1949). The report and recommendation from which McLean appeals does not constitute an order over which this court may exercise jurisdiction. We therefore deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. McLean’s motions for appointment of counsel, to remand the case, to stay the case, and for general relief are denied. 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.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

22 F. App'x 302, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mclean-v-angelone-ca4-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack