Patterson (Christopher) v. Dist. Ct. (State)

Nevada Supreme Court

Patterson (Christopher) v. Dist. Ct. (State)

Nevada Supreme Court·Decided November 13, 2014·No. 66571·Unpublished

Opinion

district court's decision on appeal in the event that he is convicted, NRS 177.015(3); NRS 177.045, he has a plain, speedy, and adequate remedy at law and, therefore, this court's intervention by way of an extraordinary writ is not warranted, NRS 34.170. Petitioner has not pointed to any circumstances that reveal urgency or strong necessity for this court to intervene even though there is an alternative remedy available. Cf. Salaiscooper v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 117 Nev. 892, 901-02, 34 P.3d 509, 515-16 (2001) (concluding that review through writ petition was warranted even though there was an alternative remedy where there were 56 similar cases with the same issues pending in lower courts and petition presented issue of great statewide importance). Accordingly, we deny the petition. See NRAP 21(b). It is so ORDERED.

/—L4 J4 J. Hardesty

ov-it y J. Douglas Cherry

cc: Hon. Elissa F. Cadish, District Judge The Law Office of Dan M. Winder, P.C. Attorney General/Carson City Clark County District Attorney Eighth District Court Clerk

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 2 101 1947A 41M49

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

district court's decision on appeal in the event that he is convicted, NRS 177.015(3); NRS 177.045, he has a plain, speedy, and adequate remedy at law and, therefore, this court's intervention by way of an extraordinary writ is not warranted, NRS 34.170. Petitioner has not pointed to any circumstances that reveal urgency or strong necessity for this court to intervene even though there is an alternative remedy available. Cf. Salaiscooper v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 117 Nev. 892, 901-02, 34 P.3d 509, 515-16 (2001) (concluding that review through writ petition was warranted even though there was an alternative remedy where there were 56 similar cases with the same issues pending in lower courts and petition presented issue of great statewide importance). Accordingly, we deny the petition. See NRAP 21(b). It is so ORDERED.

/—L4 J4 J. Hardesty

ov-it y J. Douglas Cherry

cc: Hon. Elissa F. Cadish, District Judge The Law Office of Dan M. Winder, P.C. Attorney General/Carson City Clark County District Attorney Eighth District Court Clerk

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 2 101 1947A 41M49

Patterson (Christopher) v. Dist. Ct. (State), (Neb. 2014).

Pincite

Patterson (Christopher) v. Dist. Ct. (State) (Patterson (Christopher) v. Dist. Ct. (State)) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related