OPINION OF THE COURT
The State 1 challenges the district court’s entry, in this next friend petition, of a stay of execution pending an independent psychiatric exam and evidentiary hearing to determine Mr. Moser’s mental competency.
The parties have not delineated the basis of our jurisdiction nor do they dispute it. It is nonetheless incumbent upon us to
*691
ensure a proper exercise of our appellate jurisdiction. Because the effect of the stay here is injunctive in nature, we exercise jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1292(a)(1).
See Brown v. Vasquez,
We review the district court’s entry of the stay of execution for an abuse of discretion.
Wainwright v. Ford,
Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s grant of a stay of execution pending an independent psychiatric examination and eviden-tiary hearing to assess Mr. Moser’s mental competence given that it is the threshold issue in the determination of standing of the “next Mend” who petitioned on Mr. Moser’s behalf. The mandate shall issue forthwith.
Notes
. The “State” includes Martin Horn, Commissioner, Pennsylvania Department of Corrections; and Joseph P. Maurkiewicz, Superintendent of the State Correction Institution at Rockview.
