Stewart v. State of Nevada

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

* * * TOMMY STEWART, Case No. 2:21-cv-01245-RFB-NJK

Petitioner, ORDER v.

NEVADA, STATE OF, et al.,

Respondents.

Petitioner Tommy Stewart has submitted what he has styled as a pro se notice of appeal of the denial of his state petition for writ of habeas corpus (ECF No. 1-1). His filing suffers from several defects. First, he has failed to include either the $5.00 filing fee or a fully completed application to proceed in forma pauperis. Local Rule LSR 1-2.

Second, to challenge his state court conviction or sentence in federal court he must file a federal petition for writ of habeas corpus and that petition must be on the court’s form. This court may entertain a petition for writ of habeas corpus “in behalf of a person in custody pursuant to the judgment of a State court only on the ground that he is in custody in violation of the Constitution or laws or treaties of the United States.” 28 U.S.C. § 2254(a). Alleged errors in the interpretation or application of state law do not warrant habeas relief. Hubbart v. Knapp, 379 F.3d 773, 779-80 (9th Cir. 2004).

Accordingly, this action will be dismissed as improperly commenced and for failure to state a claim for which relief may be granted.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that this action is dismissed without prejudice as improperly commenced and for failure to state a claim cognizable in federal habeas corpus.

' IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a certificate of appealability is denied.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk SEND to petitioner one copy of the application to proceed in forma pauperis with instructions and one copy of the court’s form ‘ 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas corpus petition. ° IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk enter judgment accordingly and close this case.

DATED: 4 August 2021.

AS

RICHARS-& BOLLYWARE, II UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE