Nash v. Gentry

D. Nevada

Nash v. Gentry

DecidedSeptember 11, 2019

Docket2:16-cv-00901

StatusUnknown

This text of Nash v. Gentry (Nash v. Gentry) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, D. Nevada primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Nash v. Gentry, (D. Nev. 2019).

Pincite

Opinion

6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 8 * * * 9 NANCY E. NASH, Case No. 2:16-cv-00901-JCM-NJK 10 Petitioner, 11 v. ORDER

12 JO GENTRY, et al., 13 Respondents. 14 15 16 On October 12, 2016, this court entered an order and judgment dismissing this 17 habeas corpus case with prejudice as time-barred under 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d). ECF Nos. 18 9/10. Petitioner Nash did not file an appeal. 19 On November 12, 2018, Nash filed a motion for immediate discharge based upon 20 an alleged failure to treat her medical condition(s). ECF No. 17. Nash fails to identify 21 circumstances that would warrant reconsideration of the order and judgment dismissing 22 this case. See Fed. R. Civ. Pro. 59(e), 60(b). In addition, her motion asks the court to 23 address the conditions of her confinement, which is relief not available in a federal 24 habeas corpus proceeding. See Nettles v. Grounds, 830 F.3d 922, 927 (9th Cir. 2016) 25 The proper proceeding for the relief Nash seeks would be an action under 42 U.S.C. § 26 1983. Id. 27 1 IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that petitioner’s motion for immediate discharge 2 || (ECF No. 17) is DENIED. 3 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a certificate of appealability is denied. 4 DATED September 11, 2019.

6 Litas ©. Atala UNITEDISTATES DISTRICT JUDGE

8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 8 * * * 9 NANCY E. NASH, Case No. 2:16-cv-00901-JCM-NJK 10 Petitioner, 11 v. ORDER

12 JO GENTRY, et al., 13 Respondents. 14 15 16 On October 12, 2016, this court entered an order and judgment dismissing this 17 habeas corpus case with prejudice as time-barred under 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d). ECF Nos. 18 9/10. Petitioner Nash did not file an appeal. 19 On November 12, 2018, Nash filed a motion for immediate discharge based upon 20 an alleged failure to treat her medical condition(s). ECF No. 17. Nash fails to identify 21 circumstances that would warrant reconsideration of the order and judgment dismissing 22 this case. See Fed. R. Civ. Pro. 59(e), 60(b). In addition, her motion asks the court to 23 address the conditions of her confinement, which is relief not available in a federal 24 habeas corpus proceeding. See Nettles v. Grounds, 830 F.3d 922, 927 (9th Cir. 2016) 25 The proper proceeding for the relief Nash seeks would be an action under 42 U.S.C. § 26 1983. Id. 27 1 IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that petitioner’s motion for immediate discharge 2 || (ECF No. 17) is DENIED. 3 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a certificate of appealability is denied. 4 DATED September 11, 2019.

8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Nash v. Gentry, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/nash-v-gentry-nvd-2019.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack