MATHEW LEE WILLIAMS v. THE STATE OF NEVADA (2023)

ORDER DENYING PETITION

In this original petition for a writ of mandamus and/or prohibition, Mathew Lee Williams seeks an order vacating his conviction. Williams claims he was convicted pursuant to NRS 201.230, the statute is invalid because it lacks an enacting clause, and as a result, the district court acted without jurisdiction by convicting him and his conviction is invalid. Williams’ claims challenge the validity of his conviction.

We have reviewed the documents submitted in this matter, and without deciding upon the merits of any claims raised therein, we decline to exercise our original jurisdiction. See NRS 34.160; NRS 34.170; NRS 34.320; NRS 34.330; NRAP 21(b)(1); Pan v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 120 Nev. 222, 228, 88 P.3d 840, 844 (2004) (“Petitioner[ ] carr[ies] the burden of demonstrating that extraordinary relief is warranted.”). A challenge to the validity of the judgment of conviction must be raised in a postconviction petition for a writ of habeas corpus filed in the district court in the first instance.¹ NRS 34.724(2)(b); NRS 34.738(1). Accordingly, we

ORDER the petition DENIED.

Gibbons, C.J.

Bulla, J.

Westbrook, J.

FOOTNOTES

1.   We express no opinion as to whether petitioner could meet the procedural requirements of NRS chapter 34.