Court Opinion

ID: 1022822
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2013-07-04 23:28:38.413687+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:18:15.410439
License: Public Domain

UNPUBLISHED

                   UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                       FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                            No. 07-6239

ROBERT HOLLAND KOON,

                                           Petitioner - Appellant,

          versus

COLIE    RUSHTON,    Warden  of    McCormick
Correctional    Institution; HENRY    DARGAN
MCMASTER, Attorney General of the State of
South Carolina,

                                          Respondents - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Anderson. R. Bryan Harwell, District Judge.
(8:05-cv-02523-RBH)

Submitted: June 15, 2007                    Decided:   June 21, 2007

Before WIDENER, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Robert Holland Koon, Appellant Pro Se. Donald John Zelenka, William
Edgar Salter, III, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF SOUTH
CAROLINA, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:

          Robert Holland Koon seeks to appeal the district court’s

order denying his motion to stay federal proceedings pending

resolution of his state court proceedings.    The court’s order also

rejected the magistrate judge’s recommendation that Koon’s entire

28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) petition be dismissed and recommitted the

matter to the magistrate judge for further proceedings. This court

may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291

(2000), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C.

§ 1292 (2000); Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus.

Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541 (1949).   The order Koon seeks to appeal 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

the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

                                                             DISMISSED

                               - 2 -