Opinion
No. 70281
05-04-2016
TRENT LAWRENCE GETTY, Petitioner, v. THE NINTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA, IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF DOUGLAS; AND THE HONORABLE NATHAN TOD YOUNG, DISTRICT JUDGE, Respondents, and THE STATE OF NEVADA, Real Party in Interest.
ORDER DENYING PETITION
This original petition for a writ of mandamus or prohibition challenges a district court order denying a motion to dismiss an amended information on the ground that it does not properly set forth the requirements for the charged offense of first-degree felony murder. Because petitioner can challenge the district court's decision on appeal in the event that he is convicted, NRS 177.015(3); NRS 177.045, he has a plain, speedy, and adequate remedy at law and, therefore, this court's intervention by way of an extraordinary writ is not warranted, NRS 34.170. Petitioner has not pointed to any circumstances that reveal urgency or strong necessity for this court to intervene even though there is an alternative remedy available. Cf. Salaiscooper v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 117 Nev. 892, 901-02, 34 P.3d 509, 515-16 (2001) (concluding that review through writ petition was warranted even though there was an alternative remedy where there were 56 similar cases with the same issues pending in lower courts and petition presented issue of great statewide importance). Accordingly, we
In the alternative, petitioner seeks a writ of prohibition. Because the district court had jurisdiction to consider petitioner's motion to dismiss the amended information, a writ of prohibition is inappropriate. See NRS 34.320. --------
ORDER the petition DENIED.
/s/_________, J.
Hardesty /s/_________
Saitta /s/_________
Pickering cc: Hon. Nathan Tod Young, District Judge
Maria Pence, Esq.
Attorney General/Carson City
Douglas County District Attorney/Minden
Douglas County Clerk