Opinion
No. 58934.
09-14-2011
Lamar HARRIS, Petitioner, v. The EIGHTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF the STATE of Nevada, in and for the COUNTY OF CLARK; and the Honorable Donald M. Mosley, District Judge, Respondents, and The STATE of Nevada, Real Party in Interest.
Justice Law Center Attorney General/Carson City Clark County District Attorney
Justice Law Center
Attorney General/Carson City
Clark County District Attorney
ORDER DENYING PETITION
This original petition for a writ of mandamus or prohibition challenges an order of the district court denying petitioner Lamar Harris' motion to present expert eyewitness identification testimony. Having considered the petition and supporting documents, we are not satisfied that this court's intervention by way of extraordinary writ is warranted for the following reasons. First, we are unpersuaded that the district court acted arbitrarily or capriciously in denying Harris' motion and mandamus will not issue “to control judicial discretion or to review the propriety of judicial action.” Pinana v. Dist. Ct., 75 Nev. 74, 75, 334 P.2d 843, 843 (1959). Second, writ relief is unavailable as Harris has a plain, speedy, and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of the law by way of direct appeal should he be convicted. See NRS 34.170 ; NRS 34.330 ; cf. Marquis & Aurbach v. Dist. Ct., 122 Nev. 1147, 1154–55, 146 P.3d 1130, 1135–36 (2006) (mandamus will issue if district court judgment not independently appealable).
Accordingly, we
ORDER the petition DENIED.