Rowan (William) v. Dist. Ct. (State)

• Court: Nevada Supreme Court
• Decided: May 31, 2017
• Docket: 71004
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA

WILLIAM D. ROWAN, No. 71004 Petitioner, vs. THE EIGHTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA, FILED IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF MAY 3 1 2017 CLARK; AND THE HONORABLE ROB ELIZABETH A. BROWN BARE, DISTRICT JUDGE, CLERIC OF SIt2PREJIIE COURT

Respondents, BY S • DEPUTY CLERK and THE STATE OF NEVADA, Real Party in Interest.

ORDER DENYING PETITION

This original petition for a writ of certiorari requests that we review the constitutionality of certain Clark County Codes. Petitioner William D. Rowan was found in violation of Clark County Code 6.04.060, based on his failure to pay his county business license fee under Code 6.12.825, which requires an annual fee for being a property manager. After unsuccessfully appealing his conviction to the district court, Rowan filed the instant petition, arguing the county code provisions unconstitutionally conflict with NRS 244.334(3)(a) and 244.3345(3)(a). NRS 34.020(3) "authorizes [this court's] review of a certiorari petition when a district court has examined the constitutionality or validity of a statute on appeal from a conviction in justice or municipal court for a violation of that statute." Cornelia v. Justice Court, 132 Nev., Adv. Op. 58, 377 P.3d 97, 100 (2016); see also Dangberg Holdings Neu., L.L.C. v. Douglas Cty., 115 Nev. 129, 138, 978 P.2d 311, 316 (1999) ("The writ of certiorari is an extraordinary remedy and the decision to entertain

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA

(U) 1947A ,Atip, such a petition is within this court's discretion."). Here, however, the district court could not have examined the constitutionality or validity of the county codes because Rowan did not raise below the constitutional challenges set forth in his instant petition. CI State v. Taylor, 114 Nev. 1071, 1077, 968 P.2d 315, 320 (1998) ("Generally, failure to raise an issue below bars consideration on appeal."). We therefore decline to consider the petition and ORDER the petition DENIED.

, J. Douglas

cc: Hon. Rob Bare, District Judge Tanasi Law Offices Attorney General/Carson City Clark County District Attorney/Civil Division Eighth District Court Clerk

(0) )947A e 2