Hartwell v. Neven

Full title: WILLIE LAMAR HARTWELL, Petitioner, v. D.W. NEVEN, et al., Respondents

Court: United States District Court, D. Nevada

Date published: Nov 2, 2010

Case No. 2:07-CV-01371-KJD-(LRL) (D. Nev. Nov. 2, 2010)

Opinion

Case No. 2:07-CV-01371-KJD-(LRL).

November 2, 2010

ORDER

KENT DAWSON, District Judge

Before the court are petitioner's motion for reconsideration (#33) and motion to alter or amend amended order (#34). Respondents have filed an opposition (#35).

Petitioner expresses dissatisfaction with the court's denial of his amended petition for a writ of habeas corpus (#18). His contentions are more appropriate for appellate review than a motion for reconsideration. See McCarthy v. Mayo, 827 F.2d 1310, 1318 (9th Cir. 1987). See also Plotkin v. Pacific Tel. and Tel. Co., 688 F.2d 1291, 1293 (9th Cir. 1982).

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that petitioner's motion for reconsideration (#33) and motion to alter or amend amended order (#34) are DENIED.

DATED: October 2, 2010