931 F. 2d 61 - Shove v. Upchurch
931 F2d 61 Shove v. Upchurch
931 F.2d 61
Unpublished Disposition
NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.
Theodore C. SHOVE, a/k/a Anthony C. Bannano, Petitioner-Appellant,
v.
James UPCHURCH, Warden, et al., Respondents-Appellees.
No. 90-16275.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted April 19, 1991.*
Decided April 23, 1991.
Before POOLE, D.W. NELSON and NOONAN, Circuit Judges.
Advertisement
MEMORANDUM**
Theodore C. Shove, an Arizona state prisoner, appeals pro se the district court's order dismissing his habeas corpus petition under 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2254 for failure to exhaust state remedies. We dismiss this appeal for lack of jurisdiction.
Shove filed his notice of appeal while his motion under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e) to alter or amend the district court's judgment was still pending. Accordingly, the district court's judgment was not yet final and appealable, and this court therefore lacks jurisdiction to consider this appeal. See Fed.R.App. P. 4(a)(4).
DISMISSED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir.R. 36-3
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for disposition without oral argument. Fed.R.App. P. 34(a); 9th Cir.R. 34-4. Accordingly, Shove's motion for oral argument is denied. His motion for release pending appeal and his "Motion for Emergency Hearing on Obstruction of Justice" and related filings alleging that prison authorities have obstructed the delivery of his outgoing mail to this court are denied as moot