Vidal (Francisco) Vs. Dist. Ct. (State)

• Court: Nevada Supreme Court
• Decided: October 8, 2021
• Docket: 83497
• Status: Published

Opinion

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA

FRANCISCO ENRIQUE V1DAL, No. 83497 Petitioner, vs. THE EIGHTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA, FILE IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF OCT 0 8 2021 CLA.RK; AND THE HONORABLE ERIC ELIZME A. BROWN JOHNSON, DISTRICT JUDGE, CU • 4 F 4 PREME COURT BY . 411 Respondents, PUTY CLERK

and THE STATE OF NEVADA, Real Party in interest.

ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR EXTRAORDINARY RELIEF

This original pro se petition for a writ of mandamus, certiorari,

error and/or prohibition appears to seek a writ directing the district court to allow him to file an untimely notice of appeal from a district court order denying a postconviction petition for a writ of habeas corpus. Problematically, petitioner has not provided this court with exhibits or other documentation that would support his claims for relief. 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"). Therefore, without deciding the merits of the claims raised, we decline to exercise our original jurisdiction in this matter, see NRAP 21(b); Pan v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 120 Nev. 222, 228, 88 P.3d 840,

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA

OA 1947A vbirtipa 1,25933' 844 (2004) (Petitione[] carr[ies] the burden of demonstrating that extraordinary relief is warranted."). Accordingly, we ORDER the petition DENIED.

Elardesty

arraguirre Stiglich

cc: Hon. Eric Johnson, District Judge Francisco Enrique Vidal Attorney General/Carson City Clark County District Attorney Eighth District Court Clerk

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 2 O I947A 44r19,•

iatfa