Opinion
No. 57514.
01-12-2011
Kenneth REID, Petitioner, v. The EIGHTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT of the State of Nevada, in and for the County of Clark; and the Honorable James M. Bixler, District Judge, Respondents, and The State of Nevada, Real Party in Interest.
Attorney General/Carson City Clark County District Attorney
Attorney General/Carson City
Clark County District Attorney
ORDER DENYING PETITION
This original petition seeks a writ of mandamus directing the district court to conduct a Petrocelli hearing before admitting prior-bad-act evidence in a criminal trial. Having considered the petition and supporting documentation, we are not convinced that our intervention is warranted at this time.
We note that a Petrocelli hearing may be conducted pretrial or during trial before the challenged evidence is admitted.
Mandamus is an extraordinary remedy that is not intended simply to correct errors. State v. Dist. Ct. (Riker), 121 Nev. 225, 231, 112 P.3d 1070, 1074 (2005). Rather, this court will exercise its discretion to issue a writ of mandamus only “to compel the performance of an act which the law requires as a duty resulting from an office, trust, or station or to control a manifest abuse of or arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion” and only when the petitioner has no “plain, speedy, and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of the law” and “judicial economy and sound judicial administration” militate for issuing the writ. Id. This is not such a case. Petitioner has a plain, speedy, and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of the law: he can appeal to this court in the event that he is convicted. See NRS 177.015(3) ; see also Quails v. State, 114 Nev. 900, 903, 961 P.2d 765, 767 (1998) (reminding “trial courts that the efficient administration of justice depends on their conscientious adherence to the dictates of our previous decisions requiring on-the-record [Petrocelli ] hearings” but rejecting argument “that reversal on appeal is required where the trial court fails to conduct a proper Petrocelli hearing prior to admitting evidence of prior bad acts”). We therefore
ORDER the petition DENIED.