Parrish v. Williams et al

Filing 28

ORDER denying 21 Motion for Leave to refile the case. Denying as moot 22 Motion/Application for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis. Denying as moot 23 Motion for Leave to File Excess Pages. Denying as moot 24 Motion to Appoint Counsel. Denying 26 Motion for certificate of appealability. Signed by Judge James C. Mahan on 8/19/2014. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - DKJ)

1
2
3
4
5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEVADA

6
7
8
9

DARNELL LEROY PARRISH,

10

Petitioner,

11

vs.

12

Case No. 2:13-cv-00836-JCM-VCF

BRIAN E. WILLIAMS, SR., et al.,

13

ORDER

Respondents.

14
15

Petitioner has submitted another motion for leave to refile the case (#21). The court had

16

dismissed this action without prejudice to commencing a new action because petitioner had not paid

17

the filing fee. Order (#4). Petitioner had appealed the dismissal of this action. The court of appeals

18

held:

19

The request for a certificate of appealability is denied because the underlying petition fails to
state any federal constitutional claims debatable among jurists of reason.

20
21

Order (#18) (emphasis added). In the motion for leave to refile (#21), petitioner misreads

22

“underlying petition” as “notice of appeal,” and then argues that the notice of appeal contained no

23

constitutional issues because he was appealing a dismissal for failure to pay the filing fee.

24

However, the court of appeals actually reviewed the petition for a writ of habeas corpus when it

25

determined that there were no federal constitutional claims. Furthermore, to the extent that

26

petitioner argues that he tried to pay the filing fee, the court already has rejected that argument when

27

it denied petitioner’s earlier motion to reopen. Order (#11).

28

1
2
3

The denial of the motion for leave to refile (#21) makes petitioner’s other motions (#22, #23,
#24, #26) moot.
To the extent that a certificate of appealability is necessary, reasonable jurists would not find

4

the court’s conclusions to be debatable or wrong, and the court denies a certificate of appealability.

5

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that petitioner’s motion for leave to refile the case (#21) is

6

DENIED.

7

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that petitioner’s application to proceed in forma pauperis

8

(#22), motion for leave to exceed the page limit (#23), motion for appointment of counsel (#24), and

9

motion pursuant to rule 7(b)(1) (#26) are DENIED as moot.

10

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a certificate of appealability is DENIED.

11

DATED: August 19, 2014.

12
13

_________________________________
JAMES C. MAHAN
United States District Judge

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-2-