Opinion
No. 78289-COA
03-26-2019
SALVADOR MIRANDA-CRUZ, Petitioner, v. THE EIGHTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA, IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF CLARK; AND THE HONORABLE TIERRA DANIELLE JONES, DISTRICT JUDGE, Respondents, and THE STATE OF NEVADA, Real Party in Interest.
ORDER DENYING PETITION
In this original petition for a writ of certiorari or review, Salvador Miranda-Cruz challenges the validity of his judgment of conviction, alleging his guilty plea was coerced and he received ineffective assistance of counsel. We decline to exercise our discretion to entertain the petition for two reasons. See Zamarripa v. First Judicial Dist. Court, 103 Nev. 638, 640, 747 P.2d 1386, 1387 (1987) (recognizing that the issuance of a writ of certiorari is discretionary). First, the issues raised in the petition fall outside the scope of a writ of certiorari, which is limited to instances where the lower court has exceeded its jurisdiction or the district court has addressed the constitutionality of a statute or ordinance on appeal from a final judgment in a justice or municipal court. NRS 34.020(2), (3). Second, Miranda-Cruz has a plain, speedy, and adequate remedy at law that precludes writ relief—he can raise the issues asserted in the petition in a postconviction petition for a writ of habeas corpus that is filed in the district court in the first instance. See NRS 34.020(2); NRS 34.724(1), (2)(b); NRS 34,738(1). Accordingly, we
We express no opinion as to whether Miranda-Cruz could meet the procedural requirements of NRS chapter 34.
ORDER the petition DENIED.
/s/_________, C.J.
Gibbons
/s/_________, J.
Tao
/s/_________, J.
Bulla cc: Hon. Tierra Danielle Jones, District Judge
Salvador Miranda-Cruz
Attorney General/Carson City
Clark County District Attorney
Eighth District Court Clerk