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

Nevada Supreme Court

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

DecidedJuly 1, 2021

Docket82945

StatusPublished

This text of King (Kenton) Vs. Dist. Ct. (State) (King (Kenton) Vs. 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.

Bluebook

King (Kenton) Vs. Dist. Ct. (State), (Neb. 2021).

Pincite

Opinion

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA

KENTON KING, No. 82945 Petitioner, vs. THE EIGHTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA, IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF FILE CLARK; AND THE HONORABLE JUL 0 1 2021 MARY KAY HOLTHUS, DISTRICT JUDGE, Respondents, and THE STATE OF NEVADA, Real Party in Interest.

ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR A WRIT OF MANDAMUS

This original petition for a writ of mandamus seeks to compel the district court to set less restrictive conditions for pretrial release on bail. The decision to entertain a petition for extraordinary writ relief lies within the discretion of this court. Smith v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 107 Nev. 674, 677, 679, 818 P.2d 849, 851, 853 (1991) (recognizing that writ relief is an extraordinary remedy and that this court has sole discretion in determining whether to entertain a writ petition). A writ of mandamus is available only to compel the performance of a legally required act or to cure an arbitrary and capricious exercise of discretion. Round Hill Gen. Improvement Dist. v. Newman, 97 Nev. 601, 603-04, 637 P.2d 534, 536 (1981). It is petitioner's burden to demonstrate that extraordinary relief is warranted. Pan v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 120 Nev. 222, 228, 88 P.3d SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA

KO 1947A

^ 2, - 1 sc.( . . Witia 840, 844 (2004). Having considered the petition and its accompanying documents, we are not satisfied that our intervention by way of extraordinary writ is warranted. Further, petitioner has not provided this court with a copy of a district court order denying him relief in the first instance. 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"). Accordingly, we ORDER the petition DENIED.

Hardesty

J. Parraguirre

J. Cadish

cc: Hon. Mary Kay Holthus, District Judge Nevada Defense Group Attorney General/Carson City Clark County District Attorney Eighth District Court Clerk

-

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

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA

KENTON KING, No. 82945 Petitioner, vs. THE EIGHTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA, IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF FILE CLARK; AND THE HONORABLE JUL 0 1 2021 MARY KAY HOLTHUS, DISTRICT JUDGE, Respondents, and THE STATE OF NEVADA, Real Party in Interest.

ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR A WRIT OF MANDAMUS

This original petition for a writ of mandamus seeks to compel the district court to set less restrictive conditions for pretrial release on bail. The decision to entertain a petition for extraordinary writ relief lies within the discretion of this court. Smith v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 107 Nev. 674, 677, 679, 818 P.2d 849, 851, 853 (1991) (recognizing that writ relief is an extraordinary remedy and that this court has sole discretion in determining whether to entertain a writ petition). A writ of mandamus is available only to compel the performance of a legally required act or to cure an arbitrary and capricious exercise of discretion. Round Hill Gen. Improvement Dist. v. Newman, 97 Nev. 601, 603-04, 637 P.2d 534, 536 (1981). It is petitioner's burden to demonstrate that extraordinary relief is warranted. Pan v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 120 Nev. 222, 228, 88 P.3d SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA

KO 1947A

^ 2, - 1 sc.( . . Witia 840, 844 (2004). Having considered the petition and its accompanying documents, we are not satisfied that our intervention by way of extraordinary writ is warranted. Further, petitioner has not provided this court with a copy of a district court order denying him relief in the first instance. 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"). Accordingly, we ORDER the petition DENIED.

Hardesty

J. Parraguirre

J. Cadish

cc: Hon. Mary Kay Holthus, District Judge Nevada Defense Group Attorney General/Carson City Clark County District Attorney Eighth District Court Clerk

-

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

King (Kenton) Vs. Dist. Ct. (State), Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/king-kenton-vs-dist-ct-state-nev-2021.

Opinion

J. Parraguirre

J. Cadish

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack