| Case Information: 37768 | |||
| Short Caption: | ROWELL (LAMARR) VS. DISTRICT COURT | Court: | Supreme Court |
| Related Case(s): | 35960 , 36693 , 37153 , 37210 , 37242 , 37637 , 37834 , 42770 , 43218 , 44686 | ||
| Lower Court Case(s): | Clark Co. - Eighth Judicial District - C152233 | Classification: | Original Proceeding - Criminal - Proper Person Writ Petition |
| Disqualifications: | Case Status: | Notice in Lieu of Remittitur Issued/Case Closed | |
| Replacement: | Panel Assigned: | Panel | |
| To SP/Judge: | SP Status: | ||
| Oral Argument: | Oral Argument Location: | ||
| Submission Date: | How Submitted: | ||
| + Party Information |
| Docket Entries | ||||
| Date | Type | Description | Pending? | Document |
| 04/24/2001 | Filing Fee | Filing Fee Waived. | ||
| 04/24/2001 | Petition/Writ | Filed Proper Person Petition for Writ. Petition for Writ of Mandamus Peremptory. | 01-06933 | |
| 05/16/2001 | Order/Dispositional | Filed Order Denying Petition. Petitioner has filed numerous documents in the district court and this court raising substantially similar claims and challenging his three district court convictions. In denying petitioner's petition for a writ of mandamus in Docket No. 37267, this court cautioned petitioner that a prisoner could forfeit all deductions of time earned by the prisoner if the court finds that the prisoner has filed a document in a civil action for an 'improper purpose.' Petitioner's continuous stream of filings is an abuse of the process, thus the inclusion of these claims in these petitions for writ of mandamus constitutes an improper purpose. Pursuant to NRS 209.451(3), the Director of the Department of Prisons shall determine what forfeiture, if any, is warranted. 'ORDER the petitions DENIED and REFER this matter to Director of the Department of Prisons.' NNP01A-MS/DA/RR. Nos. 37766/37767/37768 (cases are not consolidated). | 01-08121 | |
| 06/26/2001 | Post-Judgment Order | Filed Order/Rehearing Denied. "Rehearing denied." fn1[Although appellant labeled his petition a 'petition for re-hearing, En Banc,' we elect to construe appellant's petition as a petition for rehearing pursuant to NRAP 40(c).] fn2[We have considered all proper person documents filed or received in this matter, and we conclude that the relief requested is not warranted.] NNP01A-MS/DA/RR. Nos. 37766/37767/37768-cases are not consolidated. | 01-10784 | |
| 07/12/2001 | Remittitur | Issued Notice in Lieu of Remittitur. | 01-10792 | |
| 07/12/2001 | Case Status Update | Remittitur Issued/Case Closed. | ||
| 07/26/2001 | Notice/Incoming | Filed Notice from U.S. Supreme Court\Certiorari Denied. A petition for a writ of certiorari was filed July 19, 2001 and placed on the docket as Case no. 01-5407. | 01-12737 | |
| 10/08/2001 | Notice/Incoming | Filed Notice from U.S. Supreme Court\Certiorari Granted. The petition for a writ of ceritorari is denied. Nos. 36601/36658/37023/37283/37766/37767/37768. (01-16839) (No action required.) | ||