Opinion
No. 69348
01-14-2016
PAUL ROBERTS, Petitioner, v. THE EIGHTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA, IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF CLARK; AND CHARLES THOMPSON, SENIOR JUDGE, Respondents, and THE STATE OF NEVADA, Real Party in Interest.
ORDER DENYING PETITION
In this original petition for a writ of mandamus, petitioner Paul Roberts challenges an order of the district court allowing the State to amend the information pursuant to NRS 173.035(2). Roberts argues that the district court acted arbitrarily and capriciously by granting leave to amend the information without a proper affidavit after a motion to add the charges was denied by the justice court at the preliminary hearing.
We conclude that Roberts has not demonstrated that the district court manifestly abused or arbitrarily or capriciously exercised its discretion and decline to exercise our discretion to consider his petition. See Smith v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 107 Nev. 674, 677, 818 P.2d 849, 851 (1991) (holding that it is within this court's discretion whether to consider a writ petition); see also State v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court (Armstrong), 127 Nev. 927, 931-32, 267 P.3d 777, 780 (2011) (defining manifest abuse and arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion); Pan v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 120 Nev. 222, 228, 88 P. 3d 840, 844 (2004) (concluding that petitioner bears the burden of demonstrating that extraordinary relief is warranted).
Accordingly, we
We direct the clerk of this court to correct the caption on the docket sheet to conform to the caption on this order. --------
/s/_________, J.
Hardesty
/s/_________, J.
Saitta
/s/_________, J.
Pickering cc: Eighth Judicial District Court Dept. 20
Hon. Charles Thompson, Senior Judge
Mueller Hinds & Associates
Attorney General/Carson City
Clark County District Attorney
Eighth District Court Clerk