Watson v. State of Nevada
ORDER. IT IS ORDERED that this action is DISMISSED without prejudice. Because jurists of reason would not find this ruling debatable or wrong, Petitioner is denied a certificate of appealability. The Clerk of the Court is directed to enter judgment accordingly. Signed by Judge Andrew P. Gordon on 7/20/2021. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - HAM)
Case 2:21-cv-00693-APG-BNW Document 5 Filed 07/20/21 Page 1 of 2
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
3 JOHN MATTHIAS WATSON, III,
Case No.: 2:21-cv-00693-APG-BNW
6 STATE OF NEVADA, et al.,
This habeas corpus action was initiated, pro se, by John Matthias Watson, III. It appears
9 that Watson has been convicted of murder and sentenced to death in state court. Watson has not
10 yet completed his state court challenges to his conviction and sentence; I am informed that an
11 appeal is pending before the Nevada Supreme Court in a habeas action brought by Watson in
12 state court. Meanwhile, Watson initiated this case in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals on
13 February 28, 2021, and Court of Appeals transferred the case to this Court on April 7, 2021. See
14 ECF Nos. 1, 2, 3.
Watson has not paid a filing fee for this action, and he has not applied for leave to
16 proceed in forma pauperis. See LSR 1-1, 1-2, 1-3, 1-4, 1-5.
Also, Watson’s habeas petition is not presented on the form required by this Court, and it
18 does not include the information necessary for the Court to screen the petition and otherwise
19 process it as a federal habeas petition. See LSR 3-1; see also Rule 4 of the Rules Governing
20 Section 2254 Cases in the United States District Courts (screening of habeas petitions).
Furthermore, Watson’s petition does not set forth any claim cognizable in a federal
22 habeas action. In his petition, Watson complains of delay in his state court proceedings, and he
23 complains of the conditions at the prison where he is incarcerated. These generally are not
Case 2:21-cv-00693-APG-BNW Document 5 Filed 07/20/21 Page 2 of 2
1 grounds for federal habeas corpus relief. Moreover, Watson gives no indication that he has
2 exhausted his state court remedies with respect to any of the allegations in his petition.
I note that Watson has, on three previous occasions, initiated habeas actions in this Court
4 and each of those actions was dismissed without prejudice. See Case No. 2:10-cv-00548-KJD5 RJJ (dismissed, without prejudice, on July 9, 2010, for failure to pay filing fee or apply for in
6 forma pauperis status); Case No. 2:11-cv-01032-KJD-LRL (dismissed, without prejudice, on
7 July 29, 2011, for failure to pay filing fee or apply for in forma pauperis status, and because the
8 petition was wholly unexhausted in state court); Case No. 2:19-cv-00379-RFB-NJK (dismissed,
9 without prejudice, on April 11, 2019, as wholly unexhausted). I also note that, while Watson
10 attempts to initiate this action pro se, he states that he is represented by counsel in his pending
11 state court proceeding. I urge Watson to consult with his counsel regarding whether, when, and
12 how to initiate a federal habeas corpus action (or a federal civil rights action).
I THEREFORE ORDER that this action is DISMISSED without prejudice. Because
14 jurists of reason would not find this ruling debatable or wrong, Petitioner is denied a certificate
15 of appealability. The Clerk of the Court is directed to enter judgment accordingly.
Dated: July 20, 2021
ANDREW P. GORDON
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?