Case ID: f-appx_36/html/0538-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Edghill Leo FRANCIS, Petitioner-Appellant, v. John ASHCROFT, Respondent-Appellee.
    No. 02-6435.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted May 24, 2002.
    Decided June 17, 2002.
    Edghill Leo Francis, Appellant Pro Se.
    Before WILKINS, NIEMEYER, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.
    Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
   PER CURIAM.

Edghill Leo Francis appeals the district court’s order dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (1994) petition, in which he challenged conditions of his confinement, without prejudice. Because Francis may amend his complaint to proceed under 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp.2001) rather than § 2241, the district court’s dismissal without prejudice is not a final order and is not subject to appellate review. See Domino Sugar Corp. v. Sugar Workers Local Union 392, 10 F.3d 1064, 1066-67 (4th Cir.1993). Therefore, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss this appeal. 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.