Court Opinion

ID: 9405651
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-06-28 21:00:57.121894+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:20:24.114235
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 23-6467      Doc: 6         Filed: 06/27/2023      Pg: 1 of 2

                                             UNPUBLISHED

                                UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                               No. 23-6467

        LARRY JAMES TYLER,

                             Petitioner - Appellant,

                      v.

        DIRECTOR OF THE DARLINGTON COUNTY DETENTION CENTER,

                             Respondent - Appellee.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Beaufort.
        Molly Hughes Cherry, Magistrate Judge. (9:22-cv-01623-MGL-MHC)

        Submitted: June 22, 2023                                              Decided: June 27, 2023

        Before HARRIS and HEYTENS, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge.

        Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        Larry James Tyler, Appellant Pro Se.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 23-6467         Doc: 6     Filed: 06/27/2023     Pg: 2 of 2

        PER CURIAM:

              Larry James Tyler seeks to appeal the magistrate judge’s order and report, which,

        among other things, recommended that the district court deny Respondent’s motion to

        dismiss Tyler’s 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition. This court may exercise jurisdiction only over

        final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C.

        § 1292; Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541, 545-

        46 (1949). The order and report that Tyler 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 this court and argument would not aid the

        decisional process.

                                                                                     DISMISSED

                                                    2