HILL v. DAVIS (2019)

Rocky Hill, Texas prisoner # 1596897, appeals an interlocutory order by the district court in his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 case. The district court denied a motion for appointment of counsel and directed Hill to file any claims challenging the conditions of his confinement in a separate action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Hill’s motion for a certificate of appealability (COA) is DENIED because a COA is unnecessary. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A); Harbison v. Bell, 556 U.S. 180, 183, 129 S.Ct. 1481, 173 L.Ed.2d 347 (2009). The appeal is DISMISSED because we lack jurisdiction to review the non-final order. See Grace v. Vannoy, 826 F.3d 813, 815-16 (5th Cir. 2016); Thomas v. Scott, 47 F.3d 713, 714-15 (5th Cir. 1995); Askanase v. Livingwell, Inc., 981 F.2d 807, 809-10 (5th Cir. 1993).

FOOTNOTES

FOOTNOTE.  

PER CURIAM:* FN* Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.