Opinion
No. 68318
07-22-2015
BRIAN EUGENE LEPLEY, Petitioner, v. THE FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA, IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF CARSON CITY, Respondent.
cc: Brian Eugene Lepley Attorney General/Carson City Carson City Clerk
An unpublished order shall not be regarded as precedent and shall not be cited as legal authority. SCR 123.
ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS
This original pro se petition for a writ of mandamus challenges a district court decision denying a motion to extend the prison copy work limit.
Having reviewed the petition, we conclude that petitioner has not met his burden of demonstrating that writ relief is warranted. First, petitioner failed to submit with the petition an appendix or any documentation necessary to evaluate the petition. NRAP 21(a)(4) (requiring petitioner to submit with his petition copies of any order, opinion, parts of the record, or any other document that may be essential to understand the matters set forth in the petition); Pan v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 120 Nev. 222, 228-29, 88 P.3d 840, 844 (2004). Further, in forma pauperis status provides that the clerk of the court shall allow a person so designated to commence or defend an action without costs and shall allow that designee to file any necessary writ, process, pleading, or paper without charge. NRS 12.015(2)(a). This court has never held that NRS 12.015 requires the court clerk to provide an in forma pauperis litigant with photocopies in connection with the litigant preparing and prosecuting his or her case. Petitioner has not otherwise identified any authority supporting an entitlement to relief. Accordingly, we
ORDER the petition DENIED.
/s/_________, J.
Saitta
/s/_________, J.
Gibbons
/s/_________, J.
Pickering
cc: Brian Eugene Lepley
Attorney General/Carson City
Carson City Clerk