Opinion
83319
08-26-2021
MICHAEL HUDSON, Petitioner, v. THE SECOND JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA, IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OFWASHOE, Respondent, and THE STATE OF NEVADA, Real Party in Interest.
UNPUBLISHED OPINION
ORDER DENYING PETITION
This original pro se petition for a writ of habeas corpus challenges petitioner's conviction. Petitioner asserts that (1) he was sexually assaulted by prison staff; (2) illegally placed in a "sling hoist"; (3) subject to a separate "viscous assault"; (4) the State has committed records fraud in his criminal case CR19-3112; and (5) he is innocent of the charges brought against him.
At the outset, we note that 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"); Pan v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 120 Nev. 222, 228, 88 P.3d 840, 844 (2004) ("Petitioned ] carr[ies] the burden of demonstrating that extraordinary relief is warranted.").
Moreover, having considered the petition, we are not persuaded that writ relief is warranted because petitioner has a plain, speedy, and adequate remedy available to him by way of an appeal from the district court's denial of such relief in the first instance. See NRAP 22 ("An application for an original writ of habeas corpus should be made to the appropriate district court. If an application is made to the district court and denied, the proper remedy is by appeal from the district court's order denying the writ."); see also Pan, 120 Nev. at 224, 88 P.3d at 841 (writ relief is proper only when there is no plain, speedy, and adequate remedy at law). Accordingly, we
ORDER the petition DENIED.
HARDESTY, C.J. PARRAGUIRRE, J. CADISH, J.