Covarrubias v. State of Nevada et al

Filing 5

ORDER that 3 Application to Proceed in forma pauperis is DENIED as moot. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that 4 Motion for Appointment of Counsel is DENIED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the clerk shall add Catherine Cortez Masto as counsel for respondent s. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the clerk shall electronically serve respondents with a copy of 1 Petition and a copy of this order. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, pursuant to Circuit Rule 22-3(a), the clerk of the court shall refer this action to t he United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the clerk of the court shall administratively close this action. Signed by Chief Judge Gloria M. Navarro on 10/20/2014. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - cc: 9th Circuit Court of Appeals - EDS)

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEVADA

2
3
4
5

PHILLIP A. COVARRUBIAS,

6

Petitioner,

7

vs.

8

STATE OF NEVADA, et al.,

9

Case No. 2:14-cv-01200-GMN-PAL

Respondents.

ORDER

10
11

Petitioner has submitted an application to proceed in forma pauperis (#3) and a petition for a

12

writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (#1). The court denies the application (#3)

13

because petitioner has paid the filing fee. The court has reviewed the petition. The court will refer

14

the petition to the court of appeals because it is a second or successive petition.

15

Petitioner challenges the validity of his judgment of conviction in State v. Covarrubias, Case

16

No. 03C190643, in the Eighth Judicial District Court of the State of Nevada. Petitioner was

17

convicted of one count of attempted sexual assault and one count of child abuse and neglect with

18

substantial mental harm. Petitioner challenged the same judgment of conviction in Covarrubias v.

19

Palmer, Case No. 3:07-cv-00120-LRH-RAM. In that action, this court denied the habeas corpus

20

petition on the merits and denied a certificate of appealability. Petitioner appealed the denial. The

21

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied a certificate of appealability.

22

The petition in this action is a second or successive petition as defined in 28 U.S.C.

23

§ 2244(b). Petitioner must first obtain authorization from the court of appeals before this court can

24

consider his petition. 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(3). Petitioner has applied for authorization before in the

25

court of appeals, Covarrubias v. Legrand, Case No. 12-72763. The court of appeals denied the

26

application.

27
28

Petitioner has submitted a motion for appointment of counsel (#4). The court denies the
motion because the court is referring the action to the court of appeals.

1
2

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the application to proceed in forma pauperis (#3) is
DENIED as moot.

3
4

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the motion for appointment of counsel (#4) is
DENIED.

5
6

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the clerk shall add Catherine Cortez Masto, Attorney
General for the State of Nevada, as counsel for respondents.

7
8

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the clerk shall electronically serve respondents with a
copy of the petition (#1) and a copy of this order. No response by respondents is necessary.

9
10

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, pursuant to Circuit Rule 22-3(a), the clerk of the court
shall refer this action to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

11
12
13

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the clerk of the court shall administratively close this
action.
DATED this 20th day of October, 2014.

14
15

_________________________________
Gloria M. Navarro, Chief Judge
United States District Court

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