Opinion
85565-COA
12-13-2022
CHRISTIAN FLORES, Petitioner, v. THE SIXTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA, IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF HUMBOLDT; AND THE HONORABLE MICHAEL MONTERO, DISTRICT JUDGE, Respondents, and THE STATE OF NEVADA, Real Party in Interest.
UNPUBLISHED OPINION
ORDER DENYING PETITION
Gibbons, C.J.
In this original petition for a writ of mandamus or, in the alternative, a writ of prohibition, Christian Flores challenges the justice court's granting of the State's motion to continue Flores' October 2022 preliminary hearing. Specifically, Flores seeks an order directing the district court to grant his petition for a writ of habeas corpus, wherein he argued to the district court that he was being unlawfully held after the justice court improperly granted the State's motion, and to discharge him from custody.
Although Flores has alternatively requested a writ of prohibition, such a writ is not the proper vehicle for obtaining the relief he is seeking. See NRS 34.320.
A writ of mandamus is available to compel the performance of an act that the law requires as a duty resulting from an office, trust, or station. NRS 34.160. The writ "does not lie to correct errors where action has been taken by the inferior tribunal," State v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 116 Nev. 127, 133, 994 P.2d 692, 696 (2000), except to control a manifest abuse or arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion, Round Hill Gen. Improvement Dist. v. Newman, 97 Nev. 601, 603-04, 637 P.2d 534, 536 (1981). Petitions for extraordinary writs are addressed to the sound discretion of the court, see State ex rel. Dep't of Transp. v. Thompson, 99 Nev. 358, 360, 662 P.2d 1338, 1339 (1983), and the "[p]etitioner[ ] carr[ies] the burden of demonstrating that extraordinary relief is warranted," Pan v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 120 Nev. 222, 228, 88 P.3d 840, 844 (2004).
Flores does not contend that the district court manifestly abused or arbitrarily or capriciously exercised its discretion in denying Flores' petition for a writ of habeas corpus. Moreover, Flores has not provided this court with any documentation reflecting the justice court's reasoning. Accordingly, without deciding on the merits of any claims raised therein, we
ORDER the petition DENIED.
Tao, J. Bulla, J.
Hon. Michael Montero, District Judge