Harris (Ammar) v. Dist. Ct. (State)
This text of Harris (Ammar) v. Dist. Ct. (State) (Harris (Ammar) v. Dist. Ct. (State)) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Nevada Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Supreme Gourt OF Nevapa
(Oy ata SRE
_Real Party in Interest.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA
AMMAR ASIM FARUQ HARRIS, No. 85060
Petitioner,
VS. .
THE EIGHTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT §
COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA, = f LL E ER
IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF
CLARK, _ AUG 10 2022
Respondent, ELIZABETIVA. BROWN and CLERK OF SUPREME COURT
THE STATE OF NEVADA, Mesoperary CLER
ORDER DENYING PETITION
This is a pro se original petition for a writ of mandamus challenging the indictment underlying petitioner’s judgment of conviction.
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). Petitioner has not supplied an appendix with copies of any documentation supporting his petition. See NRAP 21(a)(4) (providing that the petitioner shall submit an appendix containing all documents “essential to understand the matters set forth in the petition’). Further, even assuming that the relief sought here could be properly obtained through a petition for a writ of mandamus, any application for such relief should first be directed to and resolved by the district court. See State v. County of Douglas, 90 Nev. 272, 276-77, 524 P.2d 1271, 1274 (1974) (noting that “this court prefers that such an application
Z2%-VUsOI8
[for writ relief] be addressed to the discretion of the appropriate district court” in the first instance), abrogated on other grounds by Attorney Gen. v.
Gypsum Res., 129 Nev. 23, 33-34, 294 P.3d 404, 410-11 (2013). Accordingly,
we ORDER the petition DENIED. Parraguirre / LL. Maat. 5 J. AVa nl * J. \ . 4 eo Hardesty Stiglich
ec: Ammar Asim Faruq Harris Attorney General/Carson City Clark County District Attorney Eighth District Court Clerk
Supreme Court OF NEVADA
10) 147A eRe
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Harris (Ammar) v. Dist. Ct. (State), Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/harris-ammar-v-dist-ct-state-nev-2022.