Phoenix (Robert) Vs. Dist. Ct. (State)

Nevada Supreme Court

Phoenix (Robert) Vs. Dist. Ct. (State)

DecidedJune 19, 2020

Docket80800

StatusPublished

This text of Phoenix (Robert) Vs. Dist. Ct. (State) (Phoenix (Robert) 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

Phoenix (Robert) Vs. Dist. Ct. (State), (Neb. 2020).

Pincite

Opinion

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA

ROBERT ANTHONY PHOENIX, No. 80800 Petitioner, vs. THE ELEVENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA, FILED - IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF PERSHING; AND THE HONORABLE .: . JUN 1 9 2020 JIM C. SHIRLEY, DISTRICT JUDGE, ELI A. BROWN CLE E COURT Respondents, BY and CERNY CLERK

THE STATE OF NEVADA, Real Party in Interest.

ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR A WRIT OF PROHIBITION

This original petition for a writ of prohibition challenges a district court administrative order that requires drug testing, by urinalysis, on all defendants who have been released from custody prior to arraignment and sentencing. On April 16, 2020, we entered an order directing the State to file an answer to the petition. In response to this coures order, the State filed an answer contending that a change in circumstances rendered the instant petition moot. See Personhood Nev. v. Bristol, 126 Nev. 599, 602, 245 P.3d 572, 574 (2010) (noting that "even though a case may present a live controversy at its beginning, subsequent events may render the case moot"). First, the State informs us that petitioner passed away on March 26, 2020, making the petition moot as to him individually. Second, the State points out that the Eleventh Judicial District Court amended the challenged order on May 11, 2020—narrowing the scope of the order and enumerating a detailed factual basis for special needs that justify

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA

(0) 1947A cOSPID 7.0- imposition of such testing. Under these circumstances, we conclude that the issues presented in this petition are now moot and this court's intervention by way of extraordinary writ is no longer warranted. Nat'l Collegiate Athletic Assn v. Univ. of Nev., Reno, 97 Nev. 56, 58, 624 P.2d 10, 11 (1981). Accordingly, we ORDER the petition DENIED.

, C.J. Pickering

, J jelAipol , J. Hardesty Stiglich

cc: Hon. Jim C. Shirley, District Judge Pershing County Public Defender Attorney General/Carson City Attorney General/Las Vegas Pershing County District Attorney Pershing County 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

ROBERT ANTHONY PHOENIX, No. 80800 Petitioner, vs. THE ELEVENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA, FILED - IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF PERSHING; AND THE HONORABLE .: . JUN 1 9 2020 JIM C. SHIRLEY, DISTRICT JUDGE, ELI A. BROWN CLE E COURT Respondents, BY and CERNY CLERK

THE STATE OF NEVADA, Real Party in Interest.

ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR A WRIT OF PROHIBITION

This original petition for a writ of prohibition challenges a district court administrative order that requires drug testing, by urinalysis, on all defendants who have been released from custody prior to arraignment and sentencing. On April 16, 2020, we entered an order directing the State to file an answer to the petition. In response to this coures order, the State filed an answer contending that a change in circumstances rendered the instant petition moot. See Personhood Nev. v. Bristol, 126 Nev. 599, 602, 245 P.3d 572, 574 (2010) (noting that "even though a case may present a live controversy at its beginning, subsequent events may render the case moot"). First, the State informs us that petitioner passed away on March 26, 2020, making the petition moot as to him individually. Second, the State points out that the Eleventh Judicial District Court amended the challenged order on May 11, 2020—narrowing the scope of the order and enumerating a detailed factual basis for special needs that justify

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA

(0) 1947A cOSPID 7.0- imposition of such testing. Under these circumstances, we conclude that the issues presented in this petition are now moot and this court's intervention by way of extraordinary writ is no longer warranted. Nat'l Collegiate Athletic Assn v. Univ. of Nev., Reno, 97 Nev. 56, 58, 624 P.2d 10, 11 (1981). Accordingly, we ORDER the petition DENIED.

, C.J. Pickering

, J jelAipol , J. Hardesty Stiglich

cc: Hon. Jim C. Shirley, District Judge Pershing County Public Defender Attorney General/Carson City Attorney General/Las Vegas Pershing County District Attorney Pershing County Clerk

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Phoenix (Robert) Vs. Dist. Ct. (State), Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/phoenix-robert-vs-dist-ct-state-nev-2020.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack