Jones v. State, 3:14-cv-00364-MMD-VPC. (2016)
Court: District Court, D. Nevada
Number: infdco20160408i24
Visitors: 32
Filed: Apr. 06, 2016
Latest Update: Apr. 06, 2016
Summary: ORDER MIRANDA M. DU , District Judge . On July 15, 2014, this Court transferred this pro se habeas matter under 28 U.S.C. 2254 to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals as a successive petition and closed this case. (Dkt. no. 5.) On March 9, 2016, petitioner filed two motions in this case with this Court (dkt. nos. 9, 10). However, this case is closed, and this Court has no jurisdiction to consider any motions. Any recourse that petitioner may have would be with the appeals court. It is t
Summary: ORDER MIRANDA M. DU , District Judge . On July 15, 2014, this Court transferred this pro se habeas matter under 28 U.S.C. 2254 to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals as a successive petition and closed this case. (Dkt. no. 5.) On March 9, 2016, petitioner filed two motions in this case with this Court (dkt. nos. 9, 10). However, this case is closed, and this Court has no jurisdiction to consider any motions. Any recourse that petitioner may have would be with the appeals court. It is th..
More
ORDER
MIRANDA M. DU, District Judge.
On July 15, 2014, this Court transferred this pro se habeas matter under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals as a successive petition and closed this case. (Dkt. no. 5.)
On March 9, 2016, petitioner filed two motions in this case with this Court (dkt. nos. 9, 10). However, this case is closed, and this Court has no jurisdiction to consider any motions. Any recourse that petitioner may have would be with the appeals court.
It is therefore ordered that petitioner's motion for Rule 60(b) relief (dkt. no. 9) and motion for appointment of counsel (dkt. no. 10) are both denied.
Source: Leagle
