Turner v. U.S. Dist. Court for the Dist. of Nev.

Full title: JOHN ELVIN TURNER, Petitioner, v. THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE…

Court: COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF NEVADA

Date published: Feb 4, 2015

No. 65884 (Nev. App. Feb. 4, 2015)

Opinion

No. 65884

02-04-2015

JOHN ELVIN TURNER, Petitioner, v. THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEVADA; AND THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT, Respondents.

Gibbons

An unpublished order shall not be regarded as precedent and shall not be cited as legal authority.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 decisions issued by the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit and the United States District Court for the District of Nevada related to a federal district court complaint filed by petitioner.¹

1 The clerk of the court shall modify the caption on the docket for this case to conform to the caption on this order.

A writ of mandamus is available to compel the performance of an act that the law requires as a duty resulting from an office, trust, or station or to control an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion. NRS 34.160; Int'l Game Tech., Inc. v. Second Judicial Dist. Court, 124 Nev. 193, 197, 179 P.3d 556, 558 (2008). Mandamus relief is generally available only when there is no plain, speedy and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of the law. NRS 34.170.

Here, while the precise relief sought by this petition and the specific rulings being challenged are not entirely clear, petitioner appears to challenge the dismissal of his federal district court complaint by the United States District Court for the District of Nevada, and the handling of his subsequent appeal from that decision by the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. A state court, however, cannot issue a writ of mandamus directing federal courts to reconsider or otherwise alter their decisions or rulings. Cozine v. Crab tree, 15 F, Supp. 2d 997, 1013 (D. Or. 1998) ("State courts have no power to mandamus federal officials."). Accordingly, we conclude that the petition must be denied. NRAP 21(b)(1); Smith v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 107 Nev. 674, 677, 818 P.2d 849, 851 (1991).

It is so ORDERED.²

2 In light of our resolution of this petition, we deny all other relief requested by petitioner.
--------

/s/_________, C.J.

Gibbons

/s/_________, J.

Tao

/s/_________, J.

Silver
cc: John Elvin Turner

Attorney General/Carson City