King (Arnold) Vs. Dist. Ct. (State)

• Court: Nevada Supreme Court
• Decided: March 24, 2021
• Docket: 82564
• Status: Published

Opinion

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA

ARNOLD LISLE KING, No. 82564 Petitioner, vs. THE EIGHTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA, FILED IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF CLARK, MAR 11 2021 Respondent, EPO •UPREME COU and DEPUTY CLERK THE STATE OF NEVADA, Real Party in Interest.

ORDER DENYING PETITION

This original pro se petition for a writ of mandamus/prohibition challenges petitioner's judgment of conviction and seeks various relief. Having considered the petition, we are not persuaded that our extraordinary intervention is warranted. See NRS 34.170; Pan v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 120 Nev. 222, 224, 88 P.3d 840, 841 (2004) (noting that writ relief is proper only when there is no plain, speedy, and adequate remedy at law and explaining that petitioner bears the burden of demonstrating that writ relief is warranted). Even assuming that the relief sought here could be properly obtained through a petition for writ relief, any application for such relief should be made to the district court in the first instance so that factual and legal issues are fully developed, giving this court an adequate record to review. See Round Hill Gen. Imp. Dist. v. Newman, 97 Nev. 601, 604, 637 P.2d 534, 536 (1981) (recognizing that "an appellate court is not an appropriate forum in which to resolve disputed questions of face and determining that when there are factual issues presented, this court will

SUPREME CouRT OF NEVADA

(01 1947A alba not exercise its discretion to entertain a petition for extraordinary relief even though "important public interests are involved"); State v. Cty. of Douglas, 90 Nev. 272, 276-77, 524 P.2d 1271, 1274 (1974) (noting that "this court prefers that such an application [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. Gypsurn Res., 129 Nev. 23, 33-34, 294 P.3d 404, 410-11 (2013); see also NRAP 22 (An application for an original writ of habeas corpus should be made to the appropriate district court. If an application is made to the district court and denied, the proper remedy is by appeal from the district court's order denying the writ."). Accordingly, we ORDER the petition DENIED.

A Hardesty ex.,t XcLA.1.‘, , C.J.

J. Parraguirre Silver

cc: Arnold Lisle King Attorney General/Carson City Clark County District Attorney Eighth District Court Clerk

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 2 (0> 1947A