Tu (Long) Vs. Dist. Ct. (State)

Opinion

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA

LONG NGOC TU, No. 80583 Petitioner, vs. THE EIGHTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA, IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF FILED CLARK, Respondent,

MAR 0 5 2020 ELIZABETH A. BROWN

and CLERKOSIPREME COURT THE STATE OF NEVADA, BY •!") • Y DEPUTY C1

tfRI.:

111.-411r

Real Party in Interest.

ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS

In this original pro se petition for a writ of habeas corpus, petitioner appears to challenge the fairness of the proceedings below, his arrest, and his defense attorney's performance in his case.

Petitioner has failed to demonstrate that writ relief is appropriate in this instance because the claims he raises involve issues of fact, and thus petitioner must seek relief in the district court in the first instance. NRAP 22; See Round Hill Gen. Improvement Dist. v. Newman, 97 Nev. 601, 637 P.2d 534 (1981). Further, to the extent that

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA

(0) 1947A 4WD (0o-a8771 464 1.

petitioner has counsel, he must proceed by and through his counsel of record. Accordingly, we

ORDER the petition DENIED.'

Pickering

Ade.

Hardesty Cadish

cc: Long Ngoc Tu

Attorney General/Carson City Clark County District Attorney Eighth District Court Clerk

'In light of this order, we take no action on the document entitled petitioner's double jeopardy and the violations of my constitutional right, filed in this court on March 2, 2020.

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA

(0) 1947A .1411Y. 2