Davis (Raymond) Vs. State

Nevada Supreme Court·Decided February 18, 2020·No. 80501·Published

Opinion

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA

RAYMOND TYRONE DAVIS, No. 80501 Appellant,

VS.

THE STATE OF NEVADA,

Respondent.

FILED FEB 1 8 20 EL R.ROWN CLERK mE CouRV

-

BY

DEPUIY CLERK

ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL

This is a pro se appeal from a district court order denying a motion to dismiss counsel. Eighth Judicial District Court, Clark County; Jacqueline M. Bluth, Judge.

The court's review of this appeal reveals a jurisdictional defect.

Specifically, no statute or court rule provides for an appeal from a district court order denying a motion to dismiss counsel. Castillo v. State, 106 Nev. 349, 352, 792 P.2d 1133, 1135 (1990) (right to appeal is statutory; where no statute or court rule provided for an appeal, no right to appeal exists). Accordingly, this court

ORDERS this appeal DISMISSED.

A'aJbaug , tj-Zejx60 Stiglich Silver

SUPREUE COURT OF NEVADA

(0) 1947A 4010 zo-gwoi P':.tli '

ta i

cc: Hon. Jacqueline M. Bluth, District Judge Mueller & Associates Attorney General/Carson City Clark County District Attorney Eighth District Court Clerk

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA

(0) 1947A *GPO 2 ". •

41 1 11 141 'n 1r II'

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Davis (Raymond) Vs. State, (Neb. 2020).

Davis (Raymond) Vs. State (Davis (Raymond) Vs. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Castillo v. State
792 P.2d 1133 (Nevada Supreme Court, 1990)