Canterbury v. Clark Cty. Detention Ctr.
This text of Canterbury v. Clark Cty. Detention Ctr. (Canterbury v. Clark Cty. Detention Ctr.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Nevada Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA
RICHARD LEE CANTERBURY, No. 76608 Appellant, vs. CLARK COUNTY DETENTION CENTER, ALE Respondent. 4 2018 SEP Ela<911 - ; k BROWN JPRE COURT
ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL BY/ 13E.i:, :ilre CLERK
This is a pro se appeal from a district court order denying a motion for the appointment of counsel. Fifth Judicial District Court, Nye County; Kimberly A. Wanker, Judge. Our review of the documents submitted to this court pursuant to NRAP 3(g) reveals a jurisdictional defect. Specifically, it appears that the order designated in the notice of appeal is not substantively appealable. See NRAP 3A(b). This court has jurisdiction to consider an appeal only when the appeal is authorized by statute or court rule. BrownS v. MHC Stagecoach, 129 Nev. 343, 345, 301 P.3d 850, 851 (2013). No statute or court rule provides for an appeal from an order denying a motion for the appointment of counsel. We conclude that we lack jurisdiction, and we therefore ORDER this appeal DISMISSED.'
Hardesty
1 Given this dismissal, we take no action on the motion for clarification filed on September 6, 2018. SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA
(0) 1947A -41ct, cc: Hon. Kimberly A. Wanker, District Judge Richard Lee Canterbury Attorney General/Carson City Nye County Clerk
SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 2 (0) 1947A
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Canterbury v. Clark Cty. Detention Ctr., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/canterbury-v-clark-cty-detention-ctr-nev-2018.