Opinion
3:19-cv-00744-MMD-CLB
12-05-2022
ROBERTO DURAND, Petitioner, v. CLARK COUNTY DISTRICT COURTS, et al., Respondents.
ORDER
MIRANDA M. DU CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Pro se Petitioner Roberto Durand submitted an application to proceed in forma pauperis without a habeas petition or other pleading on December 16, 2019. (ECF No. 1.) On December 18, 2019, this Court dismissed the case without prejudice because it was improperly commenced. (ECF No. 3.) Durand appealed, and the Ninth Circuit denied Durand a certificate of appealability on December 14, 2021. (ECF No. 8.)
This closed matter comes before the Court for consideration of Durand's request for “safekeeping.” (ECF No. 15.) In his request, Durand explains that his “safety isn't being protected,” he is being denied medical care and educational programming, and there have been issues with discipline. (Id.) Durand “order[s] the Court to take action.” (Id.) Although it is not entirely clear what Durand is requesting, it appears that his issues are not properly brought in a closed 28 U.S.C. § 2254 action for a writ of habeas corpus. Rather, it appears that these issues lie in a civil-rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
It is therefore ordered that this Court will take no action on Durand's “safekeeping” request (ECF No. 15).