United States District Court, D. Nevada
RICHARD F. BOULWARE, II UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
action is a pro se petition for a writ of habeas
corpus filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 by a Nevada
state prisoner. On April 18, 2016, the Court entered an order
and judgment dismissing the action without prejudice. (ECF
Nos. 7 & 8). Petitioner had failed to file a properly
completed application to proceed in forma pauperis
with all required attachments. (ECF No. 7). Pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 1915(a)(2) and Local Rule LSR 1-2, petitioner
must attach to his pauper application both an inmate account
statement for the past six months and a properly executed
January 24, 2017, the Court held a hearing at which it
vacated the order of dismissal and judgment. (ECF No. 38).
The Court ordered the above-captioned case consolidated with
Case No. 2:16-cv-01093-RFB-CWH. The instant case, being the
first filed case, was designated as the lead case.
(Id.). Petitioner challenges the same state court
conviction in both cases. The Court directed petitioner to
submit the paperwork required for a complete in forma
pauperis application in this case. (Id.). On
February 16, 2017, petitioner filed a revised application to
proceed in forma pauperis. (ECF No. 40). The
application includes an inmate account statement and a
properly executed financial certificate. Upon review of the
application and good cause appearing, petitioner's
application to proceed in forma pauperis is granted.
has filed motions prior to and subsequent to the Court's
January 24, 2017 hearing. Several months prior to the
Court's hearing, petitioner filed a combined motion for
the appointment of counsel and for an evidentiary hearing.
(ECF No. 11 & 12). On May 12, 2016, petitioner filed a
“motion for leave to explain petition.” (ECF No.
14). Since the filing of petitioner's revised application
to proceed in forma pauperis, petitioner has filed
several more motions. Petitioner has filed three motions to
compel documents (ECF Nos. 37, 47 & 48) and two motions for
the production of documents (ECF Nos. 46 & 49). Additionally,
on March 14, 2017, petitioner filed a motion for a
certificate of appealability. (ECF No. 52). On March 21,
2017, petitioner filed an “emergency motion for
judicial examination.” (ECF No. 55).
Court has reviewed all of petitioner's motions in this
case. The problem is that there is no operative habeas corpus
petition in this action or in 2:16-cv-01093-RFB-CWH. As
indicated in this Court's order of March 20, 2017, in
2:16-cv-01093-RFB-CWH, it appears that petitioner sought to
file an amended petition, but he failed to do so in the
proper manner. The petition filed in the instant case was not
submitted on the Court's approved form. (ECF No. 1-1). To
the extent that petitioner sought to file an amended petition
in other documents, he has not used the Court's form
petition. The Local Rules of Court require petitioners
appearing in pro se to file their habeas petitions
on the Court's approved form. Local Rules of Special
Proceedings 3-1 (“a petition for a writ of habeas
corpus, filed by a person who is not represented by an
attorney, shall be on the form provided by this
court.”). The Court's form habeas petition contains
questions that require detailed answers that the Court needs
before it can determine whether petitioner states a viable
habeas corpus claim. This Court must conduct a preliminary
review of the petition to determine whether the petition
should be dismissed or whether the State will be directed to
respond to the petition. See Rule 4 of the Rules
Governing Section 2254 Cases in the United States District
Courts. Additionally, any motion seeking the appointment of
counsel requires that the Court review the petition,
including details such as the nature of petitioner's
conviction and the structure of petitioner's prison
sentence. Moreover, any other type of motion sought by
petitioner cannot be granted in the absence of an operative
petition. As such, the motions mentioned above are denied
without prejudice. Petitioner may file new motions, as
appropriate, after he files an amended petition in this
Court will direct the Clerk of Court to provide petitioner
with the approved form for filing an a pro se
petition for a writ of habeas corpus. In filing an amended
petition, petitioner must comply with the instructions to the
form petition, including rules regarding the attachment of
additional pages. The Court notes that petitioner previously
submitted a 113-page prolix document at ECF No. 4 in
2:16-cv-01093-RFB-CWH. Petitioner filed a similar 606-page
document at ECF No. 6 in the instant case. The Court has no
duty to hunt through voluminous pages of allegations to glean
what claims petitioner actually wishes to raise. McHenry
v. Renne, 84 F.3d 1172, 1177-79 (9thCir.
1996). Further, petitioner shall not attach to his amended
petition documents comprising the state court record.
(See Rule 5 of the Rules Governing Section 2254
Cases in the United States District Courts) (respondents
shall file relevant portions of state court record). The
amended petition must concisely set forth those claims that
petitioner believes might be a basis for granting relief from
his criminal conviction or sentence. Finally, petitioner is
reminded that his amended petition must be filed in the
instant case, and should not be filed in
THEREFORE ORDERED that petitioner's application to
proceed in forma pauperis (ECF No. 40) is GRANTED.
FURTHER ORDERED that petitioner's motions, at ECF Nos.
11, 12, 14, 37, 46, 47, 48, 49, 52, and 55 are DENIED WITHOUT
PREJUDICE to seeking such relief in future motions.
FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Court shall send petitioner
one copy of the approved form for filing a pro se
petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
§ 2254, and one copy of instructions for the same.
FURTHER ORDERED that, within forty-five (45) days from the
date of the entry of this order, petitioner SHALL FILE an
amended habeas petition in this case, 2:16-cv-00813- RFB-GWF.
Petitioner's failure to file an amended petition on the
approved form provided by this Court may result in the
dismissal of this action.
FURTHER ORDERED that petitioner shall file all future
pleadings and motions in the instant case,
2:16-cv-00813-RFB-GWF. Petitioner shall file no ...