petition in state district court

Based on the minutes from the juvenile court, I filed this:

The State's opposition:

My reply :

Transcript of the hearing for the above:

notice of appeal filed:

More alleged fraud by the district attorney. From the minutes of the hearing where the petition was denied by the Court.

From the transcript above, page 6, the last statements made by the Court:

But the minutes say at the end of the hearing, :

"State to prepare the order as to findings of fact and conclusions of law."

What happened?

The State did not prepare the order as the Court instructed, instead,

the unfiled order prepared by the State wrote this and submitted to the Court:

First, where in the transcript does the Court mention "State to prepare the order" ? I do recall the minutes are correct and the Court did make that statement. So why is the Court's statement missing?

There needs to be an explanation for the discrepancy between the minutes and the transcripts

This is further alleged evidence the district attorneys have access to and routinely criminally alter court transcripts.

Alleged reason, this time, to alter the the transcripts:

Because the Court's "findings of fact and conclusions" are erroneous on the face, the State wants to cover up this flawed order and just have the Court say "denied". The erroneous statements the Court made in the hearing, reflected in the transcript, are explained in my "appellant's informal brief" I will be filing to the Nevada Supreme Court when the Court finally does file its order.

The district attorney removed the part where the Court says "State to prepare the order as to findings of fact and conclusions of law.". Clear fraud conducted on Court.

Also this fraud would explain why the Court has delayed any order it will have to file because the Court, I allege, is arguing with district attorney about why it cannot express its reasons for denial in a formal way separate than the "loose" verbal statements the Court made at the hearing.

I filed my "appellant's informal brief" before the district court's order, explanation explained in document:

Then the Nevada Supreme Court filed this order:

With one week to spare, the District Court files it order. Noting the Court added text to the State's order reflecting some the text from the transcript.

Then I filed my amended appellant's informal brief :

Then the court filed its erroneous order:

As usual, absurd conclusions from ignoring what I wrote:

At least the court stated my claims correctly in the second paragraph.

The court stated, page 1, "However, a factual error does not include claims of newly discovered evidence because these types of claims would not have precluded the judgment from being entered in the first place."

That is a totally absurd statement, because, as an example, when exculpatory dna information is submitted as newly discovered evidence, that "would not have precluded the judgment from being entered" ??? Unbelievable!! But that demonstrates the lengths the court will go to deny, resorting to an absurd statement like that!

Here, the Nevada Supreme Court is demonstrating is abuse of its authority!

Then, on page 3, the court stated, "... juvenile court proceedings was reasonably available to be raised while he was in custody." Here, for the second time the court completely ignores my indigency claim. That is clear abuse when I specifically informed the court of this continued ignoring.

And, page 3, the court stated, "Because Warenback could have raised his claim while he was in custody, even were the claim within the scope of a petition for a writ of coram nobis, it is waived."

So, the court is making the admission my claim is in the scope of coram nobis! But the court still denies as waiver because the court just can't stop ignoring my indigency!

But it's all in the record to demonstrate the Nevada Supreme Court is illegally protecting illegal convictions in Nevada.

Here is my last filing, petition for rehearing, I ever can do in the Nevada courts on my case, but it sums up everything :

Of course, corruption is confirmed and well documented :

Here is chief justice mark gibbons,

or best described as chief criminal justice mark gibbons : also see the video below, shows he is careless, doesn't give damn attitude.

And the main reason to deny :

The court will go to a such criminal level to deny my petition is, as expected, money. Liability for a wrongful conviction is, as of this date : $50,000/year for prison, at 1984 days is $271,750, parole is $25,000/year at 167 days is $11,437, sex offender registration is $25,000/year at 1265 days as of October 6, 2021 is $86,625, so total is $369,812 the State of Nevada would have to pay me wrongfully convicting me on actual innocence.

Plus, at an average of $33,000/year Clark county would have to pay back about $180,000 to the state of Nevada of my prison time.

So, total loss to Nevada/Clark county is about $550,000! Thus, the Nevada Supreme court has good reason to protect its assets, at the cost of taking my freedom away.