Kea (Kupaa) v. Dist. Ct. (Warden)

Opinion

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA

KUPAA KEA, No. 84217 Petitioner, vs. THE SECOND JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA, IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF FL WASHOE, Respondent, MAR i 1 2022 and ELIZABETH A. BROWN CLERK OF AJPREME COURT

WARDEN JOHN DOE, OF NORTHERN BY 6.N ( DEPUTY CLERK

NEVADA CORRECTIONAL CENTER, Real Party in Interest.

ORDER DENYING PETITION

This is an original pro se petition for a writ of mandamus seeking the application of credits to petitioner's sentence pursuant to both NRS 209.4465 and NRS 209.4475.

At the outset, we note that petitioner has not provided this court with exhibits or other documentation that would support his claims for relief. See NRAP 21(a)(4) (providing the petitioner shall submit an appendix containing all documents "essential to understand the matters set forth in the petition"); Pan v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court. 120 Nev. 222, 228, 88 P.3d 840, 844 (2004) (Petitioned ] cardies] the burden of demonstrating that extraordinary relief is warranted.").

Moreover, having considered the petition, we are not persuaded that writ relief is warranted because petitioner has a plain, speedy, and adequate remedy available to him by way of an appeal from the district court's denial of such relief in the first instance. "A postconviction petition

2

for a writ of habeas corpus is 'the only remedy available to an incarcerated person to challenge the computation of time that the person has served pursuant to a judgment of conviction."' Williams v. State, De13't of Corr., 133 Nev. 594, 596, 402 P.3d 1260, 1262 (2017) (quoting NRS 34.724(2)(c)); see also Pan, 120 Nev. at 224, 88 P.3d at 841 (writ relief is proper only when there is no plain, speedy, and adequate remedy at law). Accordingly, we ORDER the petition DENIED.

, C.J.

Parraguirre

/1 J.

Hardesty

Al4G4,0 J.

Stiglich

cc: Kupaa Kea Attorney General/Carson City Washoe District Court Clerk