Anda di halaman 1dari 5

J

J
(temporarily suspended)
il.
IN THE SECOND JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA
IN AND FOR THE COUNT OF WASHOE
STATE BAR OF NEVADA,
PETITIONER,
IIZCeIARYB COUGHLIN
NV BAR NO 9473, RESPONDENT
Case No.: ng12-D204, ng12-0434, ng 12-
0435
Dept. No. Northern ofice of the State Bar
of Nevada
Subpoena and subpena decus teum
Dear 010 Judge Elliot, Judge Flanagan, and the Second Judicial District Court Cieri of
II
Cocci Joey Orduna Hasitings, WDC Custodian of Records, Associate Clerk of Court
Julie Wise:
Included in the relevant materials and information sought is the legal basis for
incarcerating il Cr12-0376 (despe DDA Young violating NRS 178.405's mandatory
stay, in his moving for a "Motion for Revocation of Bail" (despite WDCR 19 requiring a
hearing be set, Coughlin never got one in cr11-204, nor in cr12-1262 (both Judge Elliot
involving pro se Coughlil, nor did Coughlin get a hearing in cv11-03628, well,
was two hearings on Hill's fraudulent Motion for Order to Show cause, but that it
not what wdcr 19 is invoking)Coughlin between april 1911, 2012 to April 26, 2012 (during
which time the $40,050 attorneys fees motion resulting in an Order awarding it in CV11-
03628 filed) for appealing a summary eviction as a pro se tenant ,apparently
deemed residential tenant with met of less than $1 K a month) also, despe Chief Civil
Clerk kconstantly rejecting Coughlin's filign under wdcr 10, Coughlin was actually
sanctioned yet another $5K by his former coworker, Judge Flanagan (Wom declined to
recuse hiTself form the order to show cause hearings despite, arguay, Coughlin
requeting as much, in violation of nrs 22.030(3) ... but RCSfQLS in the Carpentier v
Aames case (that Richard hill copied Coughlin's January 13th, 2012 fiing on in cv08-
01709 in hills 1f24f12 grievance to bar counsel against Coughlin ... whi:h Coughlin
smject to custodial arrest for jaywalking by rpd and hill on 1f12f12, and another arrest
Z

II
for "mlsuse of 911" on 1114112, seemirl!y conncted to fiing in crpentier mattr of
1113112, vil alec WDCR 18 and 0 W .CpUenferNpldend %fkgm
qo<metsutn.ttm J. UfilinJ nWtnil)m?.'holl l .M etollocm:m.
AON
'UUL'T5J1L^UA
1AY' \
Gscnt1 ..W.. 9Wbw Woia. .r1 .w m ?#c
c . ::wy! ^ W*1 . wrWk180.. agq7
Further, caplow 302 p.2c755 made unnecessary the seemrngly fraudulent 31812
afficav of service by wcso macl1en, by way Ormc marshal harley (udge nash holmes
3112112 comments M court seem to incate "summary criminl contempt" finding
premised upon 'peeping Tom" style peering through restrom stall walls b RMC
Marshal Harley (or some other Marshal, like Scott Coppa, irwolvec in the impermissile
'search incdentto arrest" b RMC a a fun day after atorney's pro se criminal defenant's
smartphone and miro S card boked into WCdc property on 2127112 .. _vilate state v
diaz_ .. anyways, no "summary contempt" finding based upon allegations O
"dlssessemblign" smaltphone M restrom stall, where no RMC Malshal. Halley or
Coppa or otherwie, signed an affidavit detailing facts supporting contempt. In re oliver
requires such contempt be, Mevery element, in the "immediate vie and presence of
the court" sixth amendment nght violated, nrs 189_01005 violated, etc , etc.an most
of this ng12-045 iovoNes judge nash holmes denng Coughlin right to appel finl
appealable summary criminal contempt finding from 2127112_, in re oliver, denied sixh
amendment rightto counsel, and Co 267 us 517 M 536 [as dkljudge Flanagan in
3123112 contempt hearing of Coughlin), nltying Coughlin ^3123112 hearing on hill's
order to show cause motion in cv11-03628 before Judge Flangn (nrcp 56(g) bad faith
afdavs should result in expense awards and cntempt finding against hI, perhaps,
bker, and stewart _not $40K in attorneys fees against Coughin, de nollO review and
hearing required by wcdr 19 not provided. _plus i n rmc 111r 26800judge nash homes
violates nrs 189_010 by refusing Vtransml recrd on appeal and transcript M response
to Coughlin fwign a notice of appel on 317112 (fmc's garder, brother to Judge Linda
Gardner, whose April 209 Order got COLhlin fired from washoe legal services
Z

1V

l
1
+

1
k
L
4
Z
Z

(60301 0317 cse in c), she passd her Qfder V her bother, PE pased it V
Judge Nash mes. she rned Ilg12.35 on behalf of all judges, and apparently
family curt Judge L. Gardner (Coug,lln IMed mandamus to that order In 54&4-).
Als, why G Cu!lin thrown in jail based Upo!1 "evaluation" IWed on -{18/12 by dr. bill
davis (where davis denis any rEslbMy K the letter he sign.ea, saying he din1
wlte i and dln1 submt lorlililg? He SIGNED l1and Lakes Ied t, 3rgV3bly
shuld'llI eyell be lied, and should Dan afldit 6Coughli nwa Incarcerated VI
cmp"r in C0p'esence PP..N
Inarcerating Cu\t1lln 1 aprl to JM <, 11 in CJZo, ancrel\lsng W
even halthe auttldy Coughlr. altmpl to swml respoclll\g t: competeney
Olde rs, h ipa a rights (also, (rdEr was D sufiently dear, Wany Valin th areof by
Coghlin, under Houston v 8L Judiil rst.,lt OHto SUppIt 8 days in Ja4 and wdcd
denYing Coughlin his mediction and right to lile curt douments, resulting In > h
attorney lees award by JlJdge Aooagn F cv11-3628_ ,plIJS MHC's blondo lied aboLt
basi lor Coguhlin' remoYsl in MH 12.(Q32 in her leters to RJC. Als Ir.p 37(b)(2)(d)
lrsr.erat'n wn!lJl (civil nJe, bUt peaps intructie) JO 11eU I O X
Dear WOC: YOU CMMANDED to appear bel<e the 9456 UUDE 6d Suh B,
Reno, NV 89521. J[|(775) 3294100 at f1e Stte Bar DNevada's t-rl1ern Cllce, SBN
Bar Counsel David Clark, Esq gve Coulllfn per mission Y s issue this s\bpoena.
Cou(hln is proceeding on an indigent basis.
Failure b any pelSOIl '1flout ade(lte e)CUse to obey a 5poen served upn thil
person ma be deemed a cntempt Othe O PD which the s\Jpena isued.lNeva<
RIles 0Civil Pocedire. RIle 45(e)! NEVADA RULES OF CW PROEDURE. RUlE -5(c}
am-5(0)
(e) PROTETION OF PERSONS &ECT TO SUBPOENA
(1)Jparty QWo0mf0U1SSmam5Nma MW\a
rle MQl0avod irOUunle D dn W0ooQa r$QSojel ulM
5Hm 60Obeaf 0w6tc5WOW 6$H$vO5mEM6ct1O#aM
Ie l4on 1mMa'o i teac OIs <an allOl1 e unction. W}
nooe, Oi s m linedto.losi earnings and a reasonabl anars Ie,.
(XA) A pelSon commanded loproche and permit inspedio and o;ng Cdeslg>ated
bodes, papers, ooclIllens Q| lallE Is, al insp!tiOl Opremises Med hapear 4n
2
4
3

3
1
1
!
2
II
person t the plc e Oproduction Of i nSection unl ess corrmnded to aPfer for deposition,
herlr" ortial
(B) SUbject t Dpu Qriph (d)(2) Ots rule. person comm red to produce r permit
inspection r copyir" my. within 14 daysfter Sefce Othe swpoena or before the time
Secified for c ompIi nee if sue h time Gless th n 14 dys fler sel;i ce, ser..e upon the p rty O
attorney designated in the stbpoena written objecion to inSection or COfrl Uny or I U
the desiQnted materialS or Uthe premises. Ifoqectionis made, the party sefir" the
suqoe na shall not be entitled to i nspe ct a r copy the materia Is C| inspect the pre mses except
puuart to anorderof the cWrt by wtich I he soopoena was i5sued, objection has been
made. the party servinQ the subpoena may, upon notice to the person corrmared to produce,
move at any time for an order to cOlel the production. Such n order to cOrTel production
ha|protect BO]person who is not prty Of aUotlie O8 prtyfrom sigcnt expense
resuln9 from the inspection nd copyir" cnded
(3)(A) On time moon, the court b which a swpoen wn issued sh1I qush or moeH the
suqoeJl if t
fils to a!ow resonbe time for rmptance:
(I) requires person who is prty orn office O prty to trvel to plce
more thn 100 mil's from the plce where tht person resides, is employed or regulrJy
Iransacts business in person, except that such person my in O0!Dtted tri1 be
c orrm nded to trve I from ny suc h pill ce wil hi n the stte in whic h the tri I is held, or
(iiil requires disclosure U privileQed or other proected mtter nd no excetion
Or wive( aWles, or
(;v) subjects personto undue burden.
(8) swpoen
m lU0utU5OS0kSlIUO tr de secret or olher confide NmI research,
deve bpmert. com merd I iror atn, or
[iiI requires disclosure Un uretined expert's opinion or irtorm'ion m
describir" Secific events or occurrences in dispute nd r esUh9 from the expert's study
mde not t the request U any prty. the court my, to proect person slJct to M
ffected by the swpoen, ql!sh or modify the swpoen or, if the prty in whose behr
Ihe subpoen is issued shows swstf1li1 need forthe testimony or mteri1 tht
C Mot be otherli se met without ldue h rds nd aSSles tht t he person to whom
the slJbfoen i aoaessed wilt be resonty c<ensted, the COl't my order
ppernce or production on l(on specified conations.
(d) DUTIES IN RESPONDING TO SUBPOENA
(1) A person respoMdl1 to subpoen to prowce denls stlal proOce Itlem s they re
ket1 in the usu1 course Obusiness or sh11 OQanize ard Illbel them to correSond with the
cte!Ories in the demnd.
(2) \en informtkn subjec to soen is witrtleld on a clim tht i5 p!iveged L sube
to proection s trial preprtion mterils, the clim sh1I be mde epresslynd shall OB
suwoed by descrillOof the ntue of 9 dert, cOunkahons, or thinQs h
produced 1OO| I 6UCQ O enble the demMir" pM to contest the cIim .

II
2
J

STATEOFnevda)
).
Proof L SERVICE
COTY L_)
1, ,being T dul , depses and sys: That atfl i a C9ZOthe
Ul"ited Sbtes, Ole( 1 yeiS O a

: ane V am .. received the within &Jbpoena aro


S.n Duces Tecum on the C}of OCtobr ( of . 2012 , and persnally servec

7
copy O je <l upn Clerk of Court Dreunl Hastfngs, Or ASSOC\te Clerk Julie Iise, I
8
member OVC filing oIiee staf and or Judges AdminlstratiVe PDL the 3 day O
OCtoer,2012
StgnallJte of 0% Maki uKC BS| TO O3 M g, uet pe of petjJ1
NRS 53.05, hllng personally serllee the abole meotionee doOJmeots
1
1

1
Z
2
2
Time O sefl/ice
Place O serviee
server cntact irtormation
f
7
c

I
I
t
7
7
)Yl
7sf
r
>