Matadamas-Serrano v. Clark Cty. Pub. Defender'S Office
This text of Matadamas-Serrano v. Clark Cty. Pub. Defender'S Office (Matadamas-Serrano v. Clark Cty. Pub. Defender'S Office) 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
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA
RUBEN MATADAMAS-SERRANO, No. 84988 Petitioner, vs. FILE CLARK COUNTY PUBLIC AUG 0 4 2022 DEFENDER'S OFFICE, ELIZABETH A. BROWN Respondent. CLERKPREME COURT \ DEPUTY CLERK ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR A WRIT OF MANDAMUS
This original pro se petition for a writ of mandamus challenges a district court order denying petitioner's motion to dismiss counsel. Petitioner has failed to include with his petition necessary documentation supporting his request for relief. NRAP 21(a)(4) (petitioner must provide all documents essential to understand the matters set forth in the petition); NRAP 21(c) (petitions for extraordinary writs shall to the extent practicable conform to NRAP 21(a)). Accordingly, we ORDER the petition DENI
Parr uirre
J. Hardesty
AlLtbat..V J. Stiglich
ce: Hon. Jerry A. Wiese, Chief Judge Ruben Matadamas-Serrano Clark County Public Defender SUPREME COURT Eighth District Court Clerk OF NEVADA
111-17A 3-2-1-1475-
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Matadamas-Serrano v. Clark Cty. Pub. Defender'S Office, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/matadamas-serrano-v-clark-cty-pub-defenders-office-nev-2022.