Opinion
No. 66730
02-12-2015
RENARD TRUMAN POLK, Petitioner, v. STEPHEN CLARK; DON POAG; AND JOHN SCOTT, Respondents.
An unpublished order shall not be regarded as precedent and shall not be cited as legal authority. SCR 123.
ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR EXTRAORDINARY RELIEF
Pro se petitioner has filed a "Petition for Judicial Review," which seeks this court's intervention in the prison grievance process. As petitioner has not met his burden of demonstrating that our extraordinary intervention is warranted, Pan v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 120 Nev. 222, 224, 228, 88 P.3d 840, 841, 844 (2004); see NRAP 21(a)(1) and (4) (requiring service on respondents and an appendix that includes all documents "essential to understand the matters set forth in the petition"); Round Hill Gen. Improvement Dist. v. Newman, 97 Nev. 601, 604, 637 P.2d 534, 536 (1981) (when factual, rather than legal, issues are presented, this court will not exercise its discretion to consider an original writ petition); State v. Cnty. of Douglas, 90 Nev. 272, 276-77, 524 P.2d 1271, 1274 (1974) ("this court prefers that such an application [for extraordinary relief] be addressed to the discretion of the appropriate district court" in the first instance), we deny the petition. NRAP 21(b)(1).
It is so ORDERED.
/s/_________, J.
Saitta
/s/_________, J.
Gibbons
/s/_________, J.
Pickering
cc: Renard Truman Polk