Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
GREGORY ALAN DANKOWSKI, Petitioner, v. JUSTICE COURT OF PAHRUMP TOWNSHIP, COUNTY OF NYE, STATE OF NEVADA; THE HONORABLE KIRK VITTO, JUSTICE OF THE PEACE; THE HONORABLE MICHELE FIORE, JUSTICE OF THE PEACE AND THE HONORABLE WILLIAM GUS SULLIVAN, JUSTICE OF THE PEACE, Respondents.
ORDER DENYING PETITION
This is a pro se original petition for a writ of mandamus or petition to establish factual innocence. Petitioner Gregory Alan Dankowski seeks an order directing the justice court to withdraw his no contest plea based on the ineffectiveness of counsel, review the evidence before the justice court, and order the justice court to grant his motion to dismiss.
A writ of mandamus is available to compel the performance of an act that the law requires as a duty resulting from an office, trust, or station, NRS 34.160, or to control a manifest abuse or arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion, Round Hill Gen. Improvement Dist. v. Newman, 97 Nev. 601, 603-04, 637 P.2d 534, 536 (1981). A writ of mandamus will not issue, however, if the petitioner has a plain, speedy, and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of the law. NRS 34.170.
We have considered all the documents filed in this matter, and we are not satisfied this court's intervention by way of extraordinary writ is warranted. See NRS 34.160; NRS 34.170; Pan v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct., 120 Nev. 222, 228, 88 P.3d 840, 844 (2004) (“Petitioner[ ] carr[ies] the burden of demonstrating that extraordinary relief is warranted.”). Dankowski may appeal the denial of his motion to withdraw the no contest plea and the denial of the motion to dismiss to the district court. See Nev. Const. art. 6, § 6; Waugh v. Casazza, 85 Nev. 520, 521, 458 P.2d 359, 360 (1969) (recognizing that the district court has final appellate jurisdiction in cases arising in the justice court). Because Dankowski has a plain, speedy, and adequate legal remedy, extraordinary relief is unwarranted. To the extent Dankowski's petition constitutes a petition to establish factual innocence, such a petition may not challenge a misdemeanor conviction, nor may it be raised in this court for the first time. See NRS 34.960(1). Accordingly, we
ORDER the petition DENIED.
Bulla, C.J.
Gibbons, J.
Westbrook, J.
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Docket No: No. 89785-COA
Decided: March 11, 2025
Court: Court of Appeals of Nevada.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)