Opinion
No. 61550.
08-27-2012
Michael Charles MEISLER, Petitioner, v. The NINTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF the STATE of Nevada, in and for the COUNTY OF DOUGLAS; and the Honorable Michael P. Gibbons, District Judge, Respondents, and The State of Nevada, Real Party in Interest.
Michael Charles Meisler Attorney General/Carson City Douglas County District Attorney/Minden
Michael Charles Meisler
Attorney General/Carson City
Douglas County District Attorney/Minden
ORDER DENYING PETITION
This is a proper person emergency petition for a writ of prohibition. Petitioner seeks an order directing the district court to continue the proceedings in the district court for an indefinite period of time. Petitioner, who is representing himself in the district court, indicates that he needs further time and money to prepare for a trial set to begin on August 28, 2012. Petitioner further expresses dissatisfaction with several pretrial rulings made by the district court.
The petition includes a request for a stay of the district court proceedings. That request is deficient because it must be made in a separate motion that complies with NRAP 27 and explains why a stay is warranted. Nevertheless, considering our order denying the petition, we deny the stay request.
We have considered the documents submitted by petitioner, and without deciding upon the merits of any claims raised in the petition, we are not satisfied that this court's intervention by way of extraordinary relief is warranted. To the extent that petitioner challenges the pretrial rulings of the district court, he has an adequate legal remedy as interlocutory decisions of the district court may be raised on direct appeal if he is convicted. See NRS 34.330 ; NRS 177.045. Accordingly, we
We note that a petition for a writ of prohibition is the improper vehicle as petitioner has not alleged or demonstrated that the proceedings are without or in excess of the jurisdiction of the district court. See NRS 34.320.
ORDER the petition DENIED.