Samson Loynachan v. Lorie Davis, Director

Fifth Circuit

Samson Loynachan v. Lorie Davis, Director

676 F. App'x 330

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedFebruary 9, 2017

Docket15-11020

StatusUnpublished

This text of 676 F. App'x 330 (Samson Loynachan v. Lorie Davis, Director) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Samson Loynachan v. Lorie Davis, Director, 676 F. App'x 330 (5th Cir. 2017).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM: *

Samson M. Loynachan, Texas prisoner #1789266, who stands convicted of murder, seeks a certificate of appealability (COA) to appeal the district court’s order denying his motion to stay his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 proceeding so that he could exhaust his state court remedies. He contends that the district court abused its discretion in denying his motion, arguing *331 that he did not engage in dilatory tactics in the state courts.

Loynachan’s motion for a COA is DENIED AS UNNECESSARY as no COA is required to review the district court’s ruling .on this non-merits issue. See Young v. Stephens, 795 F.3d 484, 494 (5th Cir. 2015), cert. denied, — U.S. —, 136 S.Ct. 1453, 194 L.Ed.2d 557 (2016). His appeal is DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction, however, because the district court’s order is not immediately appealable as it is neither a final order nor an appealable collateral order. See Grace v. Vannoy, 826 F.3d 813, 815-21 (5th Cir. 2016); 28 U.S.C. §§ 1291, 1292; see also Mohawk Indus., Inc. v. Carpenter, 558 U.S. 100, 106, 130 S.Ct. 599, 175 L.Ed.2d 458 (2009); Young, 795 F.3d at 494-95.

*

Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under *331 the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.

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

PER CURIAM: *

Samson M. Loynachan, Texas prisoner #1789266, who stands convicted of murder, seeks a certificate of appealability (COA) to appeal the district court’s order denying his motion to stay his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 proceeding so that he could exhaust his state court remedies. He contends that the district court abused its discretion in denying his motion, arguing *331 that he did not engage in dilatory tactics in the state courts.

Loynachan’s motion for a COA is DENIED AS UNNECESSARY as no COA is required to review the district court’s ruling .on this non-merits issue. See Young v. Stephens, 795 F.3d 484, 494 (5th Cir. 2015), cert. denied, — U.S. —, 136 S.Ct. 1453, 194 L.Ed.2d 557 (2016). His appeal is DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction, however, because the district court’s order is not immediately appealable as it is neither a final order nor an appealable collateral order. See Grace v. Vannoy, 826 F.3d 813, 815-21 (5th Cir. 2016); 28 U.S.C. §§ 1291, 1292; see also Mohawk Indus., Inc. v. Carpenter, 558 U.S. 100, 106, 130 S.Ct. 599, 175 L.Ed.2d 458 (2009); Young, 795 F.3d at 494-95.

*

Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under *331 the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

676 F. App'x 330, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/samson-loynachan-v-lorie-davis-director-ca5-2017.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack