Barnett (Corry) v. Dist. Ct. (State)
Opinion
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA
CORRY THOMAS BARNETT, A/K/A No. 84840 COREY THOMAS BARNETT, Petitioner, vs. THE EIGHTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA, FILE IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF CLARK, JUN 2 4 2022 Respondent, and THE STATE OF NEVADA, Real Party in Interest.
ORDER DENYING PETITION
This pro se original petition for a writ of mandamus seeks to compel the district court to order the production of certain records. Having considered the petition, we are not persuaded that our extraordinary and discretionary intervention is warranted. See NRS 34.170; Pan v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 120 Nev. 222, 224, 88 P.3d 840, 841 (2004) (writ relief is proper only when there is no plain, speedy, and adequate remedy at law and the petitioner bears the burden of demonstrating that writ relief is warranted). Accordingly, we ORDER the petition DENIED.
Parraguirre
, J.
Hardesty Stiglich
cc: Corry Thomas Barnett Attorney General/Carson City Clark County District Attorney Eighth District Court Clerk
SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA
(01 I7A .015,0D
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Barnett (Corry) v. Dist. Ct. (State) (Barnett (Corry) v. Dist. Ct. (State)) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.